Relative Significance of Journals,Authors, and Articles Cited in Financial Research

We evaluate journals based on their relative contributions to top-level finance research in a recent period. Journals are ranked according to the number of citations found in articles published in Journal of Finance, Journal of Financial Economics, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, and Review of Financial Studies. The analysis controls for both the average number of articles and average number of words published annually in each cited journal. We identify the fifty most frequently cited journals during this period. We also list the fifty most frequently cited authors and articles and note topical trends in the research.     

Valuation and Accounting for Inflation and Foreign Exchange

Inflation and foreign exchange raise new issues with respect to accounting representations of equity value. For example, inflation creates an earnings illusion as an artifact of the mismatching of expenses based on allocations of historical costs with current revenues in determining earnings. This mismatching distorts mappings of aggregate earnings and book values into equity value such that value‐relevant information is lost. In this article we consider the consequences of inflation and foreign exchange accounting policies, including those contained in accounting standards, on the value relevance of bottom‐line accounting numbers. Policies are identified that achieve efficient accounting in the sense that aggregate (comprehensive) earnings and book values are sufficient for an accounting representation of equity value. The linear relations that emerge provide predictions on capitalization coefficients that help explain results of empirical inquiries. As well, our analysis provides a theoretical foundation for policies contained in accounting standards that contributes to the resolution of controversies such as that concerning foreign exchange accounting.     

Dynamic Stock Markets with Multiple Assets: An Experimental Analysis

We study the performance of the rational expectations hypothesis in multiperiod experimental markets with multiple assets. We find that the markets are generally inefficient from the point of view of full information aggregation. However, arbitrage relationships hold, and it is not possible to detect the informational inefficiency by using some standard tests of market efficiency. These findings suggest that the lack of arbitrage opportunities and the failure of common tests to reject inefficiency are not sufficient to conclude that a market is informationally efficient.     

Money as a Potential Anchor for the Price Level: a Critique of the P* Approach

A number of recent articles have attempted to restore the use of a simple measure of the money supply as an indicator of future price levels and to re-establish a causal link from money to prices. Most notably Hallman, Porter and Small (HPS) (1989a), (1989b) originated the approach using US data and Hannah and James(1989) have applied it to the UK The approach broadens the traditional idea of a constant velocity of money by introducing the notion of V* and Q*, the long-run value of velocity and income. These are then used to define P from the traditional quantity theory of money as the long-run equilibrium price level. The analysis then proceeds to estimate a standard Error Correction Model (ECM) for price determination with the levels effect given by (P-P*)t-1. The conclusion drawn is that 'a measure of money that determines the long-run future level of prices is useful in determining the proper monetary policy for attaining price stability. We have shown, through the construction of P*, that M2 can serve as this determinant for the price level' (Hallman, Porter and Small (1982a) p. 23).
We argue in this paper that the P* approach is flawed. It is certainly more complex than traditional monetarist approaches but the fundamental questions of causality are in no way either affected or resolved. The P* analysis is a variant on more conventional cointegration analysis (Engle and Granger (1987), Johansen (1988), Hall (1989)) and we argue that the Johansen framework allows us to address the question in a formal and more complete way. When this approach is applied to the US data used by HPS, we find that while the P* relationship does indeed represent a cointegrating one, it does not have a causal link with prices but rather the causality runs from prices to money - this result conforms well to the work of Hendry and Ericsson (1990) or Hall, Henry and Wilcox (1990), which use this form of relationship to model the demand for money.     

Wealth and Risk Effects of Adopting Deposit Insurance in Canada: Evidence of Risk Shifting by Banks and Trust Companies

This paper confirms that adopting explicit deposit insurance expanded risk-shifting incentives for Canadian Banks and Trust Companies. By transferring responsibility for monitoring non-systematic risk to the Canadian Deposit Insurance Corporation (CDIC), deposit insurance eliminated the compensation previously paid to large-block stockholder monitors. This transfer fueled a redistribution of insured-institution stock from poorly diversified large-block shareholders to diversified investors. Also, subsequent changes in market volatility support the hypothesis that CDIC insurance and the absorption of catastrophic risk it provided reduced systematic risk in the stock market as a whole even as it increased non-systematic risk in the banking and trust-company sector.