The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Profit-Structure Relationship in Banking--Tests of Market-Power and Efficient-Structure Hypotheses
Abstract
This paper enters the debate between market-power and efficient-structure explanations of the profit-structure relationship in banking by including direct measures of X-efficiency and scale efficiency in the analysis. Structural models of two market-power hypotheses and two efficient-structure hypotheses are expressed in testable reduced form profit equations. This methodology is applied to thirty cross-sections of 1980s banking data. These data are somewhat consistent with one of the market-power and one of the efficient-structure hypotheses. However, none of the hypotheses are overwhelmingly important in explaining bank profits, suggesting that alternative theories be pursued. Copyright 1995 by Ohio State University Press.
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
Cited by
Chen, X. H., Tee, K., Elnahass, M., & Ahmed, R. (2023) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118525 · Cited by 407
Ultimate Ownership and Bank Competition
Azar, J., Raina, S., & Schmalz, M. C. (2016) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2710252 · Cited by 327
Metadata
- Authors
- Berger, A. N.
- Venue
- Journal of Money, Credit and Banking
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1995-05
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 404
- ISSN
- 0022-2879 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2047747706
- Cited by
- 1,207
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 17.08
- 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
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.
