The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A "Signal-Jamming" Theory of Predation
Abstract
We propose a new theory of predation based on "signal-jamming." In our model the predator's characteristics are common knowledge, while the entrant is uncertain of his own future profitability. The entrant uses his current profit to decide whether to remain in the market, and the predator preys to "jam" or interfere with this inference problem. Thus, our model differs from those based on "reputation effects, " in which the predator preys to signal information about himself.
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
Financial intermediation and delegated monitoring
Diamond, D. W. (1984) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.2307/2297430 · Cited by 8,476
Cited by
Financial Distress and Corporate Performance
OPLER, T. C., & TITMAN, S. (1994) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1994.tb00086.x · Cited by 1,664
(1995) · American Economic Review · Cited by 543
Do Short-Term Objectives Lead to Under- or Overinvestment in Long-Term Projects?
Bebchuk, L. A., & Stole, L. A. (1993) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.2307/2328920 · Cited by 418
Metadata
- Authors
- Fudenberg, D., & Tirole, J.
- Venue
- The RAND Journal of Economics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1986
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 366
- ISSN
- 0741-6261 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2017107201
- Cited by
- 465
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 18.17
- 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.
