The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Are Investors Influenced By How Earnings Press Releases Are Written?
Open accessAbstract
Earnings press releases are an important means by which many firms communicate to investors. This study examines whether investors are influenced by how earnings press releases are written - the tone and other stylistic attributes - using actual earnings press releases and archival capital markets data in a standard short-window event study. To measure the tone and other stylistic aspects of press releases, I use elementary computer-based content analysis. Tone is measured using a frequency count of positive or negative words. Other stylistic aspects are the overall length of the press release, the overall percentage of numbers versus words, and the complexity of the words used. Results suggest that tone of earnings press releases influences investors' reactions to earnings. An explanation for this result is provided by prospect theory (Tversky and Kahneman, 1981, 1986), which predicts that framing financial performance in positive terms, will cause investors to think about the results in terms of increases relative to reference points. Limited evidence is presented that other stylistic attributes of earnings press releases affect investors' reactions to earnings.
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 Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7455683 · Cited by 18,497 · cited 4×
“Experimental research (Kahneman, 2002; Tversky & Kahneman, 1981, 1986) has shown that individuals’ probability-dependent judgments are affected by the terms in which expected outcomes are expressed, that is, “framing effects”; and prospect theory predicts that choices differ when outcomes are…”
InfluentialThe Content Analysis Guidebook
Neuendorf, K. A. (2017) · doi:10.4135/9781071802878 · Cited by 9,286 · cited 1×
“Using term frequency counts to capture the content of a document is commonly used for textual analysis in the social sciences, where such techniques fall into the general category of analysis referred to as content analysis (Neuendorf, 2002).”
Cited by
When Is a Liability Not a Liability? Textual Analysis, Dictionaries, and 10‐Ks
LOUGHRAN, T., & MCDONALD, B. (2011) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.2010.01625.x · Cited by 6,015
The quality of sustainability reports and impression management: A stakeholder perspective
Diouf, D., & Boiral, O. (2017) · Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal · doi:10.1108/aaaj-04-2015-2044 · Cited by 429
Sentiment spin: Attacking financial sentiment with GPT-3
Leippold, M. (2023) · Finance Research Letters · doi:10.1016/j.frl.2023.103957 · Cited by 78
Can ChatGPT Decipher Fedspeak?
Hansen, A. L., & Kazinnik, S. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4399406 · Cited by 76
Metadata
- Authors
- Henry, E.
- Venue
- Journal of Business Communication
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-10-01
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 363-407
- ISSN
- 0021-9436 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3123492911
- Cited by
- 893
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 37.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
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.
