The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Disclosure Policy, Information Asymmetry, and Liquidity in Equity Markets*
Abstract
Abstract. This study investigates the relation between disclosure policy and liquidity in equity markets. Disclosure policy influences market liquidity because uninformed investors “price protect” against adverse selection, and this price protection is manifested in market liquidity. Bid‐ask spreads, the empirical measure of market liquidity used in this study, are predicted to be inversely related to disclosure policy. In addition, increased trading by informed traders and higher probability of information event occurrence are predicted to both increase spreads and intensify the relation between spreads and disclosure policy. These predictions apply during periods in which no news about the firm is disclosed or pending. The results show that relative bid‐ask spreads for firms with disclosure rankings in the bottom third of the empirical distribution are approximately 50 percent higher than spreads for firms with disclosure rankings in the top third of the empirical distribution. Tests that assume endogenous disclosure policy reveal a significant negative relation between disclosure policy and spreads, even after controlling for the effects of return volatility, trading volume, and share price. Tests for cross‐sectional variation in spreads and for the sensitivity of spreads to disclosure policy based on informed trade activity and probability of information event occurrence are generally consistent with the predictions, though these results are not statistically significant. The findings of this study are consistent with the notion that a well‐regarded disclosure policy reduces information asymmetry and hence increases liquidity in equity markets. Résumé. L'auteur analyse la relation entre la politique d'information et la liquidité des marchés d'actions. La politique d'information influe sur la liquidité du marché, étant donné que les investisseurs non informés se protègent contre les choix préjudiciables en ce qui a trait aux cours, comportement de protection qui se manifeste dans la liquidité du marché. Les écarts entre les cours acheteur et vendeur, la mesure empirique de la liquidité du marché utilisée dans la présente étude, devraient présenter, selon les prévisions, une relation inverse avec la politique d'information. De plus, l'intensification de l'activité des négociateurs informés et la probabilité accrue de l'occurrence d'un événement d'information devraient, selon les prévisions, augmenter tous les deux les écarts et consolider la relation entre les écarts et la politique d'information. Ces prévisions s'appliquent aux cours des périodes dans lesquelles aucune information nouvelle au sujet de l'entreprise n'est publiée ou n'est sur le point de l'être. Les résultats démontrent que les écarts relatifs entre cours acheteur et vendeur des entreprises dont la publication d'information les place dans le tiers inférieur de la distribution empirique sont d'environ 50 pour cent supérieurs aux écarts des entreprises dont la publication d'information les place dans le tiers supérieur de la distribution empirique. Les tests qui supposent une politique d'information endogène révèlent une relation négative significative entre la politique d'information et les écarts, même après avoir contrôlé les conséquences de la volatilité du rendement, le volume des opérations et le cours de l'action. Les tests relatifs à la variation transversale des écarts et de la sensibilité des écarts à la politique d'information, basée sur l'activité de négociation informée et la probabilité d'occurrence d'un événement d'information, sont généralement conformes aux prévisions, bien que les résultats n'en soient pas statistiquement significatifs. Les conclusions de l'étude confirment le principe selon lequel une politique d'information bien pensée réduit l'asymétrie de l'information et, par conséquent, augmente la liquidité des marchés d'actions.
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
The Market for "Lemons": Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism
Akerlof, G. A. (1970) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/1879431 · Cited by 23,016
Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity
Belsley, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (1980) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471725153 · Cited by 7,297
Disclosure, Liquidity, and the Cost of Capital
DIAMOND, D. W., & VERRECCHIA, R. E. (1991) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1991.tb04620.x · Cited by 3,836
Cited by
Healy, P. M., & Palepu, K. G. (2001) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/s0165-4101(01)00018-0 · Cited by 8,097
Disclosure level and the cost of equity capital.
Botosan, C. A. (1997) · The Accounting Review · doi:10.2308/tar-9709240185 · Cited by 3,436
The Economic Consequences of Increased Disclosure
Leuz, C., & Verrecchia, R. E. (2000) · Journal of Accounting Research · doi:10.2307/2672910 · Cited by 2,370
LEUZ, C., & WYSOCKI, P. D. (2016) · Journal of Accounting Research · doi:10.1111/1475-679x.12115 · Cited by 1,760
A Re‐examination of Disclosure Level and the Expected Cost of Equity Capital
Botosan, C. A., & Plumlee, M. A. (2002) · Journal of Accounting Research · doi:10.1111/1475-679x.00037 · Cited by 1,456
Metadata
- Authors
- WELKER, M.
- Venue
- Contemporary Accounting Research
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-03
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 801-827
- ISSN
- 0823-9150 (ISSN-L)
- 1911-3846
- OpenAlex
- W2044473084
- Cited by
- 1,181
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 4.88
- 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: Disclosure Policy, Information Asymmetry, and Liquidity in Equity Markets*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1995.tb00467.x
- The paper
- WELKER, M. (1995). Disclosure Policy, Information Asymmetry, and Liquidity in Equity Markets*. Contemporary Accounting Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1995.tb00467.x
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.