SAFE working paper
https://safe-frankfurt.de/de/publikationen/working-papers.html
Refine
Year of publication
- 2023 (36) (remove)
Document Type
- Working Paper (36)
Language
- English (36)
Has Fulltext
- yes (36)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (36)
Keywords
- climate change (3)
- social preferences (3)
- Machine learning (2)
- Sustainable Finance (2)
- AnaCredit (1)
- Asset Pricing (1)
- Bank Credit (1)
- Bank affiliation (1)
- Banking Supervision (1)
- Bayesian inference (1)
- COVID-19 Pandemic (1)
- Car Loans (1)
- Clustering (1)
- Co-residence (1)
- Consumption (1)
- Corporate Name Change (1)
- Corporate Social Responsibility (1)
- Corporate financing (1)
- Database linking (1)
- Depreciation (1)
- Disposition Effect (1)
- Dividend Policy (1)
- Empirical Asset Pricing (1)
- Energy Performance Certificate (1)
- Energy efficiency (1)
- Entity matching (1)
- Entity resolution (1)
- Equity Premium (1)
- Experimental Finance (1)
- Family dynamics (1)
- Financial Advice (1)
- Firm-bank relationship (1)
- Fund Flows (1)
- Germany (1)
- Greenwashing (1)
- Hazard estimation (1)
- Higher Moments of Return (1)
- Homeownership (1)
- Household Finance (1)
- Industry Classification (1)
- Inflation Beliefs (1)
- Information Treatment (1)
- Institution formation (1)
- Institutional Investors’ Ownership (1)
- International relationships (1)
- Investment Styles (1)
- Life Events (1)
- Life course transitions (1)
- Low-emission vehicles (1)
- Machine Learning (1)
- Mental models (1)
- Meritocracy (1)
- Monetary Policy (1)
- Money Market (1)
- Multilayer networks (1)
- Mutual Funds (1)
- Mutual funds (1)
- Net-zero transition (1)
- Overlapping generations (1)
- Preference survey module (1)
- Production (1)
- Quantitative Easing (1)
- Realization Utility (1)
- Record resolution (1)
- Redemptions (1)
- Regulation (1)
- Repo Specialness (1)
- Retail Investor (1)
- Risk Premium (1)
- Securitization (1)
- Selling Behavior (1)
- Shareholder Letters (1)
- Similarity encoding (1)
- Spatial autoregressive model (1)
- Speculation (1)
- Stochastic volatility (1)
- Sustainable Investments (1)
- Term Structure of Interest Rates (1)
- Textual Analysis (1)
- Time-varying networks (1)
- Tree-based models (1)
- Uncertainty (1)
- Utilization (1)
- asset pricing (1)
- attitudes towards inequality (1)
- balance of payments (1)
- big data (1)
- borrowing constraints (1)
- capital markets (1)
- caps (1)
- competitive equilibrium (1)
- consumption (1)
- consumption-based models (1)
- cooperation (1)
- corporate finance (1)
- corporate savings (1)
- counterfactual thinking (1)
- credit default swap (1)
- credit risk (1)
- cross-section of stock return (1)
- current account (1)
- divestments (1)
- economic rationality (1)
- emissions trading system (ETS) (1)
- externalities (1)
- fairness (1)
- financial markets (1)
- financial regulation (1)
- foreign portfolio investment (1)
- global preference survey (1)
- goal orientation (1)
- group identity (1)
- group size (1)
- habit (1)
- high consumption volatility (1)
- household finance (1)
- inference (1)
- information demand (1)
- information processing (1)
- large language models (1)
- limited arbitrage (1)
- long-run risk (1)
- mergers and acquisitions (1)
- net-zero arbitrage (1)
- net-zero plans and targets (1)
- personality traits (1)
- political polarization (1)
- private equity (1)
- private markets (1)
- public markets (1)
- recursive utility (1)
- redistribution (1)
- regulation (1)
- regulatory arbitrage (1)
- replication (1)
- responsibility (1)
- retained earnings (1)
- return expectations (1)
- securities regulation (1)
- social (1)
- social dilemma (1)
- socially responsible consumers (1)
- solution methods (1)
- taxes (1)
- term premia (1)
- transition risk (1)
- uncertainty (1)
- utility functions (1)
- validation (1)
401
In current discussions on large language models (LLMs) such as GPT, understanding their ability to emulate facets of human intelligence stands central. Using behavioral economic paradigms and structural models, we investigate GPT’s cooperativeness in human interactions and assess its rational goal-oriented behavior. We discover that GPT cooperates more than humans and has overly optimistic expectations about human cooperation. Intriguingly, additional analyses reveal that GPT’s behavior isn’t random; it displays a level of goal-oriented rationality surpassing human counterparts. Our findings suggest that GPT hyper-rationally aims to maximize social welfare, coupled with a strive of self-preservation. Methodologically, our esearch highlights how structural models, typically employed to decipher human behavior, can illuminate the rationality and goal-orientation of LLMs. This opens a compelling path for future research into the intricate rationality of sophisticated, yet enigmatic artificial agents.
409
How does group identity affect belief formation? To address this question, we conduct a series of online experiments with a representative sample of individuals in the US. Using the setting of the 2020 US presidential election, we find evidence of intergroup preference across three distinct components of the belief formation cycle: a biased prior belief, avoid-ance of outgroup information sources, and a belief-updating process that places greater (less) weight on prior (new) information. We further find that an intervention reducing the salience of information sources decreases outgroup information avoidance by 50%. In a social learn-ing context in wave 2, we find participants place 33% more weight on ingroup than outgroup guesses. Through two waves of interventions, we identify source utility as the mechanism driving group effects in belief formation. Our analyses indicate that our observed effects are driven by groupy participants who exhibit stable and consistent intergroup preferences in both allocation decisions and belief formation across all three waves. These results suggest that policymakers could reduce the salience of group and partisan identity associated with a policy to decrease outgroup information avoidance and increase policy uptake.
397
Industry classification groups firms into finer partitions to help investments and empirical analysis. To overcome the well-documented limitations of existing industry definitions, like their stale nature and coarse categories for firms with multiple operations, we employ a clustering approach on 69 firm characteristics and allocate companies to novel economic sectors maximizing the within-group explained variation. Such sectors are dynamic yet stable, and represent a superior investment set compared to standard classification schemes for portfolio optimization and for trading strategies based on within-industry mean-reversion, which give rise to a latent risk factor significantly priced in the cross-section. We provide a new metric to quantify feature importance for clustering methods, finding that size drives differences across classical industries while book-to-market and financial liquidity variables matter for clustering-based sectors.
No. 385
Flows of funds run by banks or by firms that belong to the same financial group as a bank are less volatile and less sensitive to bad past performance. This enables bank-affiliated funds to better weather distress and to hold lower precautionary cash buffers in comparison with their unaffiliated peers. Banks provide liquidity support to distressed affiliated funds by buying shares of those funds that are experiencing large outflows. This, in turn, diminishes the severity of strategic complementarities in investors’ redemptions. Liquidity support and other benefits of bank affiliation are conditional on the financial health of the parent company. Distress in the banking system spills over to the mutual fund sector via ownership links. Our research high-lights substantial dependencies between the banking system and the asset management industry, and identifies an important channel via which financial stability risks depend on the organisational structure of the financial sector.
406
Investors' return expectations are pivotal in stock markets, but the reasoning behind these expectations remains a black box for economists. This paper sheds light on economic agents' mental models -- their subjective understanding -- of the stock market, drawing on surveys with the US general population, US retail investors, US financial professionals, and academic experts. Respondents make return forecasts in scenarios describing stale news about the future earnings streams of companies, and we collect rich data on respondents' reasoning. We document three main results. First, inference from stale news is rare among academic experts but common among households and financial professionals, who believe that stale good news lead to persistently higher expected returns in the future. Second, while experts refer to the notion of market efficiency to explain their forecasts, households and financial professionals reveal a neglect of equilibrium forces. They naively equate higher future earnings with higher future returns, neglecting the offsetting effect of endogenous price adjustments. Third, a series of experimental interventions demonstrate that these naive forecasts do not result from inattention to trading or price responses but reflect a gap in respondents' mental models -- a fundamental unfamiliarity with the concept of equilibrium.
405
Shallow meritocracy
(2023)
Meritocracies aspire to reward hard work and promise not to judge individuals by the circumstances into which they were born. However, circumstances often shape the choice to work hard. I show that people's merit judgments are "shallow" and insensitive to this effect. They hold others responsible for their choices, even if these choices have been shaped by unequal circumstances. In an experiment, US participants judge how much money workers deserve for the effort they exert. Unequal circumstances disadvantage some workers and discourage them from working hard. Nonetheless, participants reward the effort of disadvantaged and advantaged workers identically, regardless of the circumstances under which choices are made. For some participants, this reflects their fundamental view regarding fair rewards. For others, the neglect results from the uncertain counterfactual. They understand that circumstances shape choices but do not correct for this because the counterfactual—what would have happened under equal circumstances—remains uncertain.