“专家评审”在私人资本市场中的作用

Reena Aggarwal, K. Hanley, Xiaofei Zhao
{"title":"“专家评审”在私人资本市场中的作用","authors":"Reena Aggarwal, K. Hanley, Xiaofei Zhao","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3715643","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We study initial coin offerings (ICOs) to understand how an unregulated market overcomes information frictions and conflicts of interest. Listing platforms both independently assess an offering and crowdsource information from \"expert\" reviewers. These experts provide more balanced textual reviews as they gain experience and receive positive feedback from the community, consistent with a reputation effect. We find that proceeds are higher when reviews are more positive even after controlling for both the reviewer's and platform's numerical rating. Finally, experts with greater potential conflicts of interest are more positive than other reviewers, but investors identify these conflicts and discount their reviews.","PeriodicalId":232169,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Other Microeconomics: Asymmetric & Private Information (Topic)","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Role of 'Expert Reviewers' in Private Capital Markets\",\"authors\":\"Reena Aggarwal, K. Hanley, Xiaofei Zhao\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3715643\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We study initial coin offerings (ICOs) to understand how an unregulated market overcomes information frictions and conflicts of interest. Listing platforms both independently assess an offering and crowdsource information from \\\"expert\\\" reviewers. These experts provide more balanced textual reviews as they gain experience and receive positive feedback from the community, consistent with a reputation effect. We find that proceeds are higher when reviews are more positive even after controlling for both the reviewer's and platform's numerical rating. Finally, experts with greater potential conflicts of interest are more positive than other reviewers, but investors identify these conflicts and discount their reviews.\",\"PeriodicalId\":232169,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Other Microeconomics: Asymmetric & Private Information (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Other Microeconomics: Asymmetric & Private Information (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3715643\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Other Microeconomics: Asymmetric & Private Information (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3715643","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

我们研究了首次代币发行(ico),以了解不受监管的市场如何克服信息摩擦和利益冲突。上市平台既可以独立评估产品,也可以众包“专家”审稿人提供的信息。随着这些专家获得经验并从社区获得积极反馈,他们提供了更加平衡的文本评论,这与声誉效应相一致。我们发现,即使在控制了评论者和平台的数值评级后,当评论更积极时,收益也会更高。最后,具有更大潜在利益冲突的专家比其他审稿人更积极,但投资者识别这些冲突并贬低他们的审稿人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Role of 'Expert Reviewers' in Private Capital Markets
We study initial coin offerings (ICOs) to understand how an unregulated market overcomes information frictions and conflicts of interest. Listing platforms both independently assess an offering and crowdsource information from "expert" reviewers. These experts provide more balanced textual reviews as they gain experience and receive positive feedback from the community, consistent with a reputation effect. We find that proceeds are higher when reviews are more positive even after controlling for both the reviewer's and platform's numerical rating. Finally, experts with greater potential conflicts of interest are more positive than other reviewers, but investors identify these conflicts and discount their reviews.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信