Mean reversion in annual earnings and its implications for security valuation

This article documents the long-horizon mean reverting character of annual earnings and tests the implications of such mean reversion for security valuation. First, both theory-based and nonparametric measures of earnings persistence decrease as the estimation order increases, revealing 40 percent less long-horizon persistence than expected under the commonly used random walk model. Second, the return responses to the earnings shocks are more closely related across firms to the higher-order measures of persistence that reflect significant long-horizon mean reversion. Third, the persistence measure derived from classical valuation theory outperforms the generic measure in explaining the return responses. Taken as a whole, these results provide evidence for significant mean reversion in the higher-order properties of earnings and for the stock market incorporating these properties in a manner consistent with classical valuation theory.     

Investor reactions to derivative use and outcomes

How do investors evaluate managers who choose whether or not to use derivatives once the outcomes of those decisions become known? Different theories offer different predictions, and we test these in three experiments. Results show that investors are more satisfied with firm managers and assign a higher value to firms when managers use derivatives (that address firm risks) than when they do not. This result occurs even though we hold constant the economic differences typically present when comparing derivative use versus non-use (that is, ex ante risk and ex post outcome), suggesting that investors reward firms that use derivatives. Additional tests reveal that investors believe that managers who use derivatives in these situations exhibit a higher level of decision-making care than those who do not use derivatives. We also document that these inferences about greater decision-making care do not apply to the speculative use of derivatives. Overall, our study adds to our understanding of how investors judge companies that use derivatives, given the resulting outcomes of such use.     

A note on the judgmental effects of the balanced scorecard's information organization

We examine judgmental effects of the balanced scorecard's organization. The balanced scorecard contains a large number of performance measures divided into four categories. We examine whether the scorecard's organization results in managerial performance evaluation judgments consistent with a recognition of the potential relations (i.e. nonindependence) of measures within a category. Supporting this idea, we find that performance evaluations are affected by organizing the measures into the balanced scorecard categories when multiple below-target (or above-target) measures are contained within a category but that evaluations are not affected when the above/below-target measures are distributed across the scorecard's four categories.     

Firms with Inconsistently Signed Earnings Surprises: Do Potential Investors Use a Counting Heuristic?

Although prior research reports that firms that consistently beat their earnings expectations are rewarded with a market‐valuation premium, most firms are inconsistent in the sign of their benchmark performance, sometimes missing and sometimes beating. In this paper, we report the results of multiple experiments to test the idea that potential investors, evaluating firms that have inconsistent benchmark performance, use a counting heuristic to discriminate among them. Our results provide strong support for the hypothesis that these investors distinguish among firms by counting the number of beats and misses they experience over an observed time interval. The judgmental effect of this beat‐frequency is incremental to the effect of the magnitude of the beats and misses of the benchmark. Our study has implications for firm managers who have inconsistent benchmark performance, suggesting that market participants do make systematic discriminations among such inconsistent firms. It also has implications for researchers by introducing a new theoretical construct to the literature—namely, the counting heuristic.     

In search of well-being: Factors influencing the movement toward and away from maladaptive consumption

Common consumption behaviors may become harmful to consumers. Maladaptive consumption is the result of an increase in frequency or amount of everyday, normal consumption (adaptive) behaviors, which may cause significant harm to consumers and society. The authors explore maladaptive behavior and investigate how important insights about maladaptive consumption may lie at the intersection of harm. Consequently, the discussion focuses on how marketers and policymakers, through their strategic approach, can both encourage and mitigate maladaptive behavior. Understanding the transition from adaptive to maladaptive behaviors, and the return to adaptive consumption patterns, is critical for marketers, consumer advocates, and policy researchers, focused on dampening overconsumption with its corresponding harm. A discussion of the implications of maladaptive consumption on consumer health and well-being sets the foundation for rethinking marketing practice and public policy. Finally, a set of research propositions are offered for future research.