The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Variations in R&D Investments of Family and Nonfamily Firms: Behavioral Agency and Myopic Loss Aversion Perspectives
Abstract
The behavioral agency model suggests that to preserve socioemotional wealth, loss-averse family firms usually invest less in R&D than nonfamily firms. However, behavioral agency model predictions are inconsistent with the well-accepted premise that family firms have a long-term investment orientation. We reconcile these seemingly incompatible predictions by adding insights from the myopic loss aversion framework, which deals with the impact of decision-making time horizons. The combination of these two prospect theory derivatives led us to hypothesize that family firms usually invest less in R&D than nonfamily firms but the variability of their investments will be greater owing to differences in the compatibility of long- and short-term family goals with the economic goals of a firm. However, when performance is below aspiration levels, we theorize that family goals and economic goals tend to converge. In this situation, the R&D investments of family firms are expected to increase and the variability of those investments decrease, relative to nonfamily firms. Analysis of 964 publicly held family and nonfamily firms from the Standard & Poor's 1500 between 1998 and 2007 support our hypotheses, confirming a need to take the heterogeneity of family firms more fully into account.
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 theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error
Heckman, J. J. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1912352 · Cited by 28,779
SOME PRACTICAL GUIDANCE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING
Caliendo, M., & Kopeinig, S. (2008) · Journal of Economic Surveys · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6419.2007.00527.x · Cited by 6,238
Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1991) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.5.1.193 · Cited by 5,019
Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth: The Common Stock Investment Performance of Individual Investors
Barber, B. M., & Odean, T. (2000) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/0022-1082.00226 · Cited by 3,955
The Effect of Myopia and Loss Aversion on Risk Taking: An Experimental Test
Thaler, R. H., Tversky, A., Kahneman, D., & Schwartz, A. (1997) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355397555226 · Cited by 1,051
The Strength of Corporate Culture and the Reliability of Firm Performance
Sørensen, J. B. (2002) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3094891 · Cited by 1,004
A Behavioral Theory of the Firm—40 Years and Counting: Introduction and Impact
Argote, L., & Greve, H. R. (2007) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1070.0280 · Cited by 606
Cited by
Antecedents, consequences, and challenges of small and medium-sized enterprise digitalization
Eller, R., Alford, P., Kallmünzer, A., & Peters, M. (2020) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.03.004 · Cited by 837
Innovation in family firms: A systematic literature review and guidance for future research
Calabrò, A., Vecchiarini, M., Gast, J., Campopiano, G., De Massis, A., & Kraus, S. (2019) · International Journal of Management Reviews · doi:10.1111/ijmr.12192 · Cited by 495
The Internationalization of Family Firms: A Critical Review and Integrative Model
Pukall, T. J., & Calabrò, A. (2014) · Family Business Review · doi:10.1177/0894486513491423 · Cited by 420
Kim, D., & Zhu, P. (2018) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2018.11.002 · Cited by 253
Resources and Innovation in Family Businesses: The Janus-Face of Socioemotional Preferences
Miller, D., Wright, M., Breton-Miller, I. L., & Scholes, L. (2015) · California Management Review · doi:10.1525/cmr.2015.58.1.20 · Cited by 160
Metadata
- Authors
- Chrisman, J. J., & Patel, P. C.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Journal
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2012-08
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 976-997
- ISSN
- 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
- 1948-0989
- OpenAlex
- W2085391041
- Cited by
- 1,395
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 91.17
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Variations in R&D Investments of Family and Nonfamily Firms: Behavioral Agency and Myopic Loss Aversion Perspectives. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5465/amj.2011.0211
- The paper
- Chrisman, J. J., & Patel, P. C. (2012). Variations in R&D Investments of Family and Nonfamily Firms: Behavioral Agency and Myopic Loss Aversion Perspectives. Academy of Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0211
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.