The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Blockchain Disruption and Smart Contracts
Abstract
Blockchain technology provides decentralized consensus and potentially enlarges the contracting space through smart contracts. Meanwhile, generating decentralized consensus entails distributing information that necessarily alters the informational environment. We analyze how decentralization relates to consensus quality and how the quintessential features of blockchain remold the landscape of competition. Smart contracts can mitigate informational asymmetry and improve welfare and consumer surplus through enhanced entry and competition, yet distributing information during consensus generation may encourage greater collusion. In general, blockchains sustain market equilibria with a wider range of economic outcomes. We further discuss the implications for antitrust policies targeted at blockchain applications. Received May 31, 2017; editorial decision May 29, 2018 by Editor Itay Goldstein.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
On computable numbers, with an application to the entscheidungsproblem
Turing, A. M. (1937) · Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society · doi:10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230 · Cited by 8,283
The Folk Theorem in Repeated Games with Discounting or with Incomplete Information
Fudenberg, D., & Maskin, E. (1986) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1911307 · Cited by 2,395
From Mining to Markets: the Evolution of Bitcoin Transaction Fees
Easley, D., O'Hara, M., & Basu, S. (2017) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3055380 · Cited by 631
Cited by
FinTech and banking: What do we know?
Thakor, A. V. (2020) · Journal of Financial Intermediation · doi:10.1016/j.jfi.2019.100833 · Cited by 1,378
Blockchain without waste: Proof-of-stake
Saleh, F. (2021) · The Review of Financial Studies · doi:10.1093/rfs/hhaa075 · Cited by 825
Goldstein, I., Jiang, W., & Karolyi, G. A. (2019) · The Review of Financial Studies · doi:10.1093/rfs/hhz025 · Cited by 686
Friedman, N., & Ormiston, J. (2022) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121403 · Cited by 365
Wang, Q., & Su, M. (2020) · Computer Science Review · doi:10.1016/j.cosrev.2020.100275 · Cited by 359
Metadata
- Authors
- Cong, L. W., & He, Z.
- Venue
- The Review of Financial Studies
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2019-04-04
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1754-1797
- ISSN
- 0893-9454 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-7368
- OpenAlex
- W3122636688
- Cited by
- 1,089
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 145.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Blockchain Disruption and Smart Contracts. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/rfs/hhz007
- The paper
- Cong, L. W., & He, Z. (2019). Blockchain Disruption and Smart Contracts. The Review of Financial Studies. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhz007
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
