The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Assessing Investor Response to Information Events Using Return and Volume Metrics
Abstract
Prior research addressing questions such as whether investors respond to a hypothesized information event used tests of unusual return and/or trading activity as alternative measures of investor response. We investigate which of these two metrics maximizes the likelihood that a researcher correctly detects the presence or absence of a response. Building on the repeated-sample framework established in Brown and Warner (1980, 1985) and Dyckman et al. (1984), we provide evidence that (1) volume-based metrics, especially measures based on numbers of transactions, provide more powerful tests of investor response to public disclosures than do return-based metrics; and (2) supplementing return-based measures with trading-based measures increases the power of tests designed to detect investor response. Our conclusions are particularly relevant when power is critical (i.e., when sample sizes are small or anticipated investor response is small). Our evidence also suggests that before concluding that investors do not respond to a public disclosure, based on a returns analysis, researchers should confirm the nonresponse inference with trading-based measures.
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
Consequences of prejudice against the null hypothesis.
Greenwald, A. G. (1975) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0076157 · Cited by 1,022 · cited 2×
“However, Kandel and Pearson (1995) find that approximately 10 percent of their sample of earnings announcements stimulate no significant price movement in the three days around the earnings announcement date.”
BackgroundMethod
Cited by
The Effects of Reporting Complexity on Small and Large Investor Trading
Miller, B. P. (2010) · The Accounting Review · doi:10.2308/accr.00000001 · Cited by 801
Textual risk disclosures and investors’ risk perceptions
Kravet, T., & Muslu, V. (2013) · Review of Accounting Studies · doi:10.1007/s11142-013-9228-9 · Cited by 685
Consequences of adopting an expanded auditor’s report in the United Kingdom
Gutierrez, E., Minutti-Meza, M., Tatum, K. W., & Vulcheva, M. (2018) · Review of Accounting Studies · doi:10.1007/s11142-018-9464-0 · Cited by 382
Do Firms Strategically Disseminate? Evidence from Corporate Use of Social Media
Jung, M. J., Naughton, J. P., Tahoun, A., & Wang, C. (2018) · The Accounting Review · doi:10.2308/accr-51906 · Cited by 380
Do Corporate Site Visits Impact Stock Prices?
Cheng, Q., Du, F., Wang, B. Y., & Wang, X. (2019) · Contemporary Accounting Research · doi:10.1111/1911-3846.12417 · Cited by 292
Metadata
- Authors
- Cready, W. M., & Hurtt, D. N.
- Venue
- The Accounting Review
- Publisher
- American Accounting Association
- Published
- 2002-10-01
- Volume
- 77
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 891-909
- ISSN
- 0001-4826 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-7967
- OpenAlex
- W2029267375
- Cited by
- 164
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.46
- 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: Assessing Investor Response to Information Events Using Return and Volume Metrics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2308/accr.2002.77.4.891
- The paper
- Cready, W. M., & Hurtt, D. N. (2002). Assessing Investor Response to Information Events Using Return and Volume Metrics. The Accounting Review. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2002.77.4.891
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.