The policy and quality of investors'' stock purchasing judgment: the application of lens model

• Main Authors: Su,Yung Chih, 蘇勇志
• Other Authors: Yen, Hsin-Hui
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2004
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/28263790587687845106

碩士 === 淡江大學 === 會計學系 === 92 === The previous studies by domestic researchers about the stock price mainly focus on what kind of information affects the stock price. Quite few studies investigate the influence of the aforesaid information on stock purchasing judgment. This study designs a questionnaire based on the past related information factors on stock price as well as the advices of the academic and the professional inquired. In addition, this study targets at the fund managers and researchers of securities investment trust companies (referred as professional investors by this study) and the associated persons of the securities companies (referred as the general investing public) to investigate what kind of information they use when making their purchasing judgment. To examine the policy and quality of investors’ purchasing judgment by domestic stock investors, this study applies the factor analytical method to analyze five configurations and nine configurations used by professional investors and general investing public respectively. Among the five configurations of professional investors, five cues are selected and analyzed by lens models (For the general investing public, five cues are recognized as five separated configurations) to tackle on the comparison of the purchasing judgments, the usage of cues, the stability of timing when facing the same issues, the consensus and the self-insight compared with other testers between the professional investors and the general investing public. The findings of this research conclude as follows: 1. Between the professional investors and the general investing public, there exists significant difference regarding the priority of the importance about information. They both emphasize the importance of accounting information whereas the former one give more value. Furthermore, there exists very big difference concerning the importance of the contents of the accounting between the two investing groups. 2. In terms of the overall policy judgment, both the professional investors and the general investing public indicate highly linearized. The latter one is higher than the former one. 3. For the individual tester, there exits very big difference for their policy making between the professional investors and the general investing public. 4. As for the usage of cues, there assumes small difference among the general investing public about the importance of each individual cue. (The most valued and the least valued cues occupy 27% and 13% of ω2 ). Of the professional investors demonstrate higher difference (The most valued and the least valued cues account for 63% and 4% of ω2 ). Apparently, the professional investors can make the judgment based on few information items. 5. Talking for the quality of judgment, the professional investors are better than the general investing public with regards to the stability, the consensus and the self-insight. 6. In terms of the experience when making their policy judgment based on the information influence between the professional investors and the general investing public, the highly experienced investors are least linearized and more capable of explaining the cues. As for the judgment quality, highly experienced of the both groups assume high consensus but indicate not obvious difference concerning the influence of stability and the self-insight.