Go to  Advanced Search

Media coverage and investor attention

Show full item record

Files in this item

Files Size Format Description   View
ubc_2009_spring_gaa_charles_clyde.pdf 3.940Mb Adobe Portable Document Format   View/Open
Title: Media coverage and investor attention
Author: Gaa, Charles Clyde
Degree Doctor of Philosophy - PhD
Program Business Administration
Copyright Date: 2008
Publicly Available in cIRcle 2009-03-09
Abstract: In this thesis, I investigate the role of investor attention in financial markets by examining the media’s coverage of corporate earnings news. The first paper studies the potential impact of information in the financial press by identifying systematic differences between aggregate corporate earnings news coverage in the Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, and the New York Times, and measures of expected coverage based on contemporaneous earnings information flows as reported in JJBIEIS. I find that publication-specific estimates of “excess” aggregate positive or negative coverage exhibit strong serial correlation, consistent with media bias. Furthermore, unexplained negative (positive) weekly coverage predicts positive (negative) returns for small-stock indices and the equal-weighted NYSE, suggesting that the effects of predictability in financial news coverage are economically significant and may be related to informational inefficiency with respect to smaller firms. The second paper examines media coverage decisions to identify the determinants of investor attention with respect to events and firms. Using ex ante predicted probability of media coverage (PMC) with respect to earnings news as a measure of attention in this context, I study the returns experienced by low-attention stocks from 1984 and 2005. As in prior studies, I find high risk-adjusted returns for “neglected” stocks, which appears to be highly consistent with, e.g., Merton’ s (1987) investor recognition hypothesis, or an information risk setting (Easley et al. (2002)). However, in examining the event-specific determinants of media coverage, I find evidence of a significant “negativity bias” in attention: holding other factors constant, bad news is more likely to attract coverage than is good news regarding an otherwise-identical firm. Given recent evidence in the literature regarding stock-price underreaction to low-attention events, this suggests asymmetric investor attention as a potential explanation for an apparent neglected firm premium in the cross-section of stock returns. Consistent with this hypothesis, I find that the excess returns to low-PMC portfolios are attributable to drift in the stock prices of low-attention “good news” firms, while low-attention “bad news” firms appear to be efficiently priced.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/2429/5736

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show full item record

All items in cIRcle are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

UBC Library
1961 East Mall
Vancouver, B.C.
Canada V6T 1Z1
Tel: 604-822-6375
Fax: 604-822-3893