Investor ideology
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Bolton et al. (2020) estimate investor preferences from proxy voting and show a difference between voting based on preferences and voting by 'money-conscious' investors.
“4. For example, Bolton et al. (2020) estimate investor preferences from their proxy voting and show a difference between voting based on preferences and voting by”
From Presidential Address: Sustainable Finance and ESG Issues— <i>Value</i> versus <i>Values</i> (2023) · cites this paper as Bolton et al. (2020)
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 52 · Cited by 183
- Authors
- Bolton, P., Li, T., Ravina, E., & Rosenthal, H.
- Affiliations
- Imperial College London (GB)
- University of Florida (US)
- Northwestern University (US)
- New York University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Bolton, Patrick
- Venue
- Journal of Financial Economics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-08
- Volume
- 137
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 320-352
- ISSN
- 0304-405X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4250929425
- Cited by
- 183
- References
- 52
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 46.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Financial Economics (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Columbia University
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Corporate Finance and Governance
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Financial Markets and Investment Strategies
- Keywords
- proxy voting, left-right ideology, public pension funds, mutual funds, corporate governance, executive compensation, shareholder preferences
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
