Additive and Multiplicative Uncertainty Revisited: What Explains the Contrasting Biases?

above the certainty level while for additive uncertainty the price should be lower than the certainty level. This note gives an intuitive explanation for the result after first presenting a parsimonious review of the two models. We also discuss which, if either, of the two models is more realistic. Received December 14, 2001; revised version received July 16, 2002 Published online: April 30, 2003 We thank referees for helpful comments. Ciaran Driver would like to acknowledge the research facilities from ANU, Canberra for their help in writing this paper.     

Option Trading and the Intervalling Effect Bias in Beta

Prior studies show that the beta coefficient of a security changes systematically as the length of measurement interval is varied. This phenomenon, which is called the intervalling effect bias in beta, has been attributed to the friction in the trading system that causes the delays in the price-adjustment process. This study shows that option listing is associated with a decline in the beta intervalling effect bias. The decline is most pronounced for small firms. We also find that our sample firms grow significantly after option listing. Since prior research indicates that market value is a major determinant of the magnitude of the intervalling effect, we re-examine our results using a subsample that controls for market value. The results indicate that the decline in the beta bias from the pre-listing to post-listing period is still prevalent after we control for the change in firm size. Overall, the evidence is consistent with the notion that option trading reduces the delays in the price-adjustment process, which in turn reduces the intervalling effect bias in beta.