When Do Analysts Adjust for Biases in Management Guidance? Effects of Guidance Track Record and Analysts’ Incentives

Prior research indicates that analysts do not fully adjust for the general downward bias in earnings guidance issued by management. We report the results of two experiments designed to investigate how guidance track record and analysts’ incentives jointly explain the extent to which analysts adjust for guidance bias. Our results suggest that analysts with accuracy incentives adjust for management’s track record of downwardly biased guidance when the bias is relatively small (one cent), but those with relationship incentives do not. Furthermore, the difference in adjustment is larger when the bias track record is inconsistent than when it is consistent. Also, when guidance bias is larger (two cents) relative to smaller (one cent), analysts with relationship incentives partially adjust, as they appear to strike a balance between accuracy and their desire to please management. These findings hold implications for investors, regulators, and the interpretation of prior research.     

EXPLAINING VARIANCE IN THE PERFORMANCE OF LONG-TERM CORPORATE BLOCKHOLDERS

This study measures and explains variance in the performance of corporations that purchase and hold blocks of stock in other corporations. Results show that following the purchase of between 5 and 50 percent of a target corporation's common stock, blockholder performance improves on average for 15 months. After 3, 7, 11, and 15-month intervals, performance is positively associated with (1) investments in targets that are suppliers or customers, (2) targets that make cross-investments into the equity securities of the blockholder, and (3) a blockholding value ratio that contrasts the value of the blockholding with the value of the blockholder.     

Selecting Pesticides and Nonchemical Alternatives: Green Thumbs' Rules of Thumb Decision Tools

This study of a sample of home gardeners indicates that rules of thumb, or heuristics, are used to select between chemical pesticides and nonchemical alternatives. Such rules of thumb serve to simplify otherwise complicated choice decisions. Heuristics commonly used to choose pesticides include how safe, effective, efficacious, and economical they are, whereas for alternative products consumers more often take into account convenience, efficiency, competency, and handiness. Generally, in an overall ranking of 24 individual choice attributes, pesticies rank low on these attributes where alternatives rank high and vice versa. Gender, age, and years using pesticides are significantly correlated with pesticide selection.     

A Test of Consumer Awareness for Adults

The purpose of this study was to develop an instrument to measure adult awareness of consumer product/service information sources, consumer protection laws and channels of recourse. The process included identification of prevalent consumer problems, development of test items based on the identified problems, and assessments of the content validity and the reliability of the instrument. The process of construct validity was initiated by developing and testing hypotheses concerning the relationships between scores on the instrument and selected socio-economic characteristics of consumers. Low consumer awareness scores were predominant, supporting the need for consumer education for adults.