MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7128160984 · doi:10.26565/2524-2547-2025-71-14

THE ROLE OF STOCKBROKERS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE STOCK MARKET AND THE PROMOTION OF GLOBAL INVESTMENT

2025· article· uk· W7128160984 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Serhii Serhiivych Zadvornykh

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Economics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageuk
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapital marketTransparency (behavior)Database transactionStock exchangeStock marketFinancial marketInvestment bankingIntermediaryContext (archaeology)Audit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the evolving role of stockbrokers in the context of global financial market transformation and the rapid expansion of digital technologies. We examine how the traditional function of brokers as mere transaction intermediaries has shifted toward more complex roles, including analytical support, strategic advisory, and information intermediation, particularly in cross-border investment contexts. We analyze empirical data from diverse regulatory environments – including the United States, Canada, the European Union, Hong Kong, Japan, and South Africa – highlighting a global trend: while the number of brokerage firms is declining, the number of individual brokers is increasing, and so is the demand for analytical services. We argue that in regions where financial information is fragmented, regulatory frameworks are underdeveloped, or linguistic and cultural barriers impede investor decisions, brokers act as crucial facilitators of market transparency and information access. Our findings show that brokers, unlike financial analysts, are often better positioned to interpret local business conditions, communicate context-specific insights, and reduce informational asymmetries that discourage foreign capital inflows. This is especially significant for emerging and frontier markets. We further evaluate the challenges that brokers face as they assume analytical roles. These include the necessity of mastering digital tools, maintaining objectivity in financial reporting, and enhancing cybersecurity practices. Based on a mixed-methods approach that integrates content analysis, comparative market review, and basic statistical correlation, we have built a nuanced understanding of how the broker profession is adapting to fintech disruption and regulatory evolution. Our results suggest that brokers who successfully integrate traditional brokerage services with analytical competencies can enhance the quality of investment decisions, foster trust among international investors. We also analyzed the differences between the activities of classical financial analysts and stockbrokers engaged in analytical activities, as well as the gaps that the latter can fill, thereby improving the availability of necessary information for global investors.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial EconomicsSame topicAuditing, Earnings Management, GovernanceFrench-language works237,207