FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2065993432> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2065993432 abstract "E quilibrium asset pricing models typically have been tested by comparing the& predictions with historical data, and then asking whether theory and historical data resemble each other enough to justify believing the theory. Comparing prediction with data is the usual method for deciding whether a theory is valid, and financial researchers have not questioned the merits of this procedure for equilibrium models. In the physical sciences, drawing conclusions about the future from historical data (that is, the results of experiments that have already been done) is possible because we believe that laws of nature that held in the past will hold in the future. This assumption is less plausible in the social sciences. Human behavior is influenced by the theories believed in and used. Continuity with history is not to be expected where a theory itself affects the beliefs on which its predictions are based, as with asset pricing theories. This article argues that, because the development of sophisticated financial theories alters behavior, testing models with data from before the models were developed does not provide an adequate test. A theory that did not predict behavior adequately before the theory’s promulgation may come to predict behavior later. Thus, conclusive rejection or acceptance of an asset pricing theory cannot be based on historical data. The emergence of a new asset pricing theory has two effects. One is that the new theory affects investor behavior and changes it. The other is that academics test it with historical data, information predating the theory. Unfortunately, a theory that did not hold before the promulgation of an argument that people should act in certain ways may hold after the argument is widely accepted. Only after circulation of the theory may there be “sufficient” investors aware that they should act in certain ways for them to eliminate (or essentially eliminate) behavior inconsistent with this theory. Testing the correctness of a theory by seeking evidence of its use before its promulgation would appear strange to researchers in other fields. For instance, there is much known about the logical implications of nuclear reactions. It is known it is possible to build a nuclear bomb and that rational military behavior is to use nuclear weapons against enemy concentrations. A rather elementary implication of modern military theory is that the Normandy Invasion could not have occurred because the Germans could have destroyed the invading forces with a few atomic bombs. Knowing this was the rational response, the Allied commanders would never have attempted the invasion. No historian or military theorist would dream of rejecting modem theories about warfare because nuclear weapons were not used when theory indicates they should have been in World War 11. The atomic bomb is recognized to be a modern and rather complex technology. No one would expect to observe its use, or the consequences of its use or threat of use, prior to its invention. Modern portfolio theory is a similarly complex invention. Why treat its introduction any differently? Let us apply these simple concepts to two" @default.
• W2065993432 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2065993432 creator A5065664382 @default.
• W2065993432 date "1990-07-31" @default.
• W2065993432 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W2065993432 title "Atomic bombs, the Depression, and equilibrium" @default.
• W2065993432 cites W1529624024 @default.
• W2065993432 cites W1975948073 @default.
• W2065993432 cites W1981655312 @default.
• W2065993432 cites W1987426637 @default.
• W2065993432 cites W2010681793 @default.
• W2065993432 cites W2015800048 @default.
• W2065993432 cites W2104795328 @default.
• W2065993432 cites W2140612847 @default.
• W2065993432 cites W2156749644 @default.
• W2065993432 doi "https://doi.org/10.3905/jpm.1990.409292" @default.
• W2065993432 hasPublicationYear "1990" @default.
• W2065993432 type Work @default.
• W2065993432 sameAs 2065993432 @default.
• W2065993432 citedByCount "3" @default.
• W2065993432 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2065993432 hasAuthorship W2065993432A5065664382 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConcept C118084267 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConcept C142450864 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConcept C149782125 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConcept C151730666 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConcept C175444787 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConcept C181236170 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConcept C185632549 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConcept C2777267654 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConcept C339426 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConcept C38652104 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConcept C76178495 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConceptScore W2065993432C118084267 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConceptScore W2065993432C142450864 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConceptScore W2065993432C149782125 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConceptScore W2065993432C151730666 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConceptScore W2065993432C162324750 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConceptScore W2065993432C175444787 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConceptScore W2065993432C181236170 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConceptScore W2065993432C185632549 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConceptScore W2065993432C2777267654 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConceptScore W2065993432C339426 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConceptScore W2065993432C38652104 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConceptScore W2065993432C41008148 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConceptScore W2065993432C76178495 @default.
• W2065993432 hasConceptScore W2065993432C86803240 @default.
• W2065993432 hasLocation W20659934321 @default.
• W2065993432 hasOpenAccess W2065993432 @default.
• W2065993432 hasPrimaryLocation W20659934321 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W1601969454 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W16702417 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W193276449 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W1972048668 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W1980249300 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W1982066477 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W2009388753 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W2040141245 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W2058307789 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W2092813991 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W2108010541 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W2116495705 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W2221967523 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W2332552573 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W2334580332 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W2481166753 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W2507662873 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W584638142 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W974116984 @default.
• W2065993432 hasRelatedWork W2126142192 @default.
• W2065993432 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2065993432 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2065993432 magId "2065993432" @default.
• W2065993432 workType "article" @default.