ArticlePloS one2017
Quantifying the effect of investors' attention on stock market.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- GMO/GMF on Social Media in China: Jagged Landscape of Information Seeking and Sharing Behavior through a Valence View.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Individual investment decision behaviors based on demographic characteristics: Case from China.PloS one · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The investors' attention has been extensively used to predict the stock market. Different from existing proxies of the investors' attention, such as the Google trends, Baidu index (BI), we argue the collective attention from the stock trading platforms could reflect the investors' attention more closely. By calculated the increments of the attention volume for each stock (IAVS) from the stock trading platforms, we investigate the effect of investors' attention measured by the IAVS on the movement of the stock market. The experimental results for Chinese Securities Index 100 (CSI100) show that the BI is significantly correlated with the returns of CSI100 at 1% significance level only in 2014. However, it should be emphasized that the correlation of the new proposed measure, namely IAVS, is significantly at 1% significance level in 2014 and 2015. It shows that the effect of the measure IAVS on the movement of the stock market is more stable and significant than BI. This study yields important invest implications and better understanding of collective investors' attention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.