Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,047

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cooperation, Opportunism, and the Invisible Hand: Implications for Transaction Cost Theory

Hill, Charles W. L.·1990·The Academy of Management Review
DOI 10.2307/258020
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Transaction cost theorists have generally neglected to consider the implications that the invisible hand of the market mechanism can have for the risk of opportunism. In the long run, the invisible hand deletes actors whose behaviors are habitually opportunistic. Consequently, as markets move toward the state of competitive equilibrium, the risk of opportunism will be low, even for transactions supported by specific asset investments. Therefore, in many contexts the transaction cost rationale for internalization has been overstated.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/258020

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 3 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Hill, C. W. L.
Venue
The Academy of Management Review
Publisher
Academy of Management
Published
1990-07
Volume
15
Issue
3
Pages
500
ISSN
0363-7425 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2307/258020
OpenAlex
W2081388928
Cited by
1,047
References
3
FWCI
8.37
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.