Conflict of Interest and the Credibility of Underwriter Analyst Recommendations¶
Michaely, & Womack. Conflict of Interest and the Credibility of Underwriter Analyst Recommendations. Review of Financial Studies.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Domain-specific¶
- Cheap Talk
- Empirical work found underwriter-affiliated analysts issued systematically more optimistic recommendations
This sourceReview of Financial Studies, 1999. Michaely and Womack (1999) find that underwriter analysts' recommendations show significant evidence of bias, which the market does not fully recognize.
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
“We conclude that the recommendations by underwriter analysts show significant evidence of bias. We show also that the market does not recognize the full extent of this bias.”
- Empirical work found underwriter-affiliated analysts issued systematically more optimistic recommendations
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This work's DOI is recorded above but has not been resolved against an external catalogue, so nothing here confirms the work exists.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:d9fb3fd22d43 · see in the full table