Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T12:38:56.366Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Natural Behavior toward Risk and the Question of Value Determination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2009

Blaine Huntsman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This study deals with behavioral assumptions that necessarily underlie the theory of asset valuation. Recognized logical and empirical implausibilities associated with the particular set of assumptions that provides the underpinnings of much currently espoused asset theory are reviewed. A valuation model based on a more realistic set of behavioral assumptions is then proposed and tested empirically.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , March 1973 , pp. 335 - 350
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1]Arditti, F. “Risk and the Required Return on Equity.” Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, September 1964. An abstract of this study was published in Journal of Finance, March 1967.Google Scholar
[2]Arrow, K. “Comment on the Portfolio Approach to the Demand for Money and Other Assets.” The Review of Economics and Statistics. Supplement, February 1963, pp. 24–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Baumol, W. J. “An Expected Gain-Confidence Limit Criterion for Portfolio Selection.” Management Science, October 1963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Bernoulli, D. “Exposition of a New Theory on the Measurement of Risk.” Translated by DrSommer, Louis. Econometrica, vol. 22 (1954), pp. 23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Cootner, P., and Holland, D.. “Report on Study of Risk and Rate of Return.” Massachusetts Institute of Technology DSR Project 9565, March 1963. Unpublished. An abstract of this study appears in The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, Autumn 1970, pp. 211–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Fama, E. F. “Risk, Return, and Equilibrium: Some Clarifying Comments.” Journal of Finance, March 1968, pp. 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Hicks, J. B. “Liquidity.” Economic Journal, December 1962, pp. 787–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Huntsman, B. “Wealth, Risk and a Theory of Valuation.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1968.Google Scholar
[9]Lintner, John. “Security Prices, Risk and Maximum Gains from Diversification.” Journal of Finance, December 1965, pp. 587–615.Google Scholar
[10]Markowitz, H. “Portfolio Selection.” The Journal of Finance, vol. 7 (March 1952), pp. 77–91.Google Scholar
[11]Miller, M., and Modigliani, F.. “Dividend Policy, Growth, and the Valuation of Shares.” Journal of Business, October 1961, pp. 411–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12]Miller, M. “Some Estimates of the Cost of Capital to the Electric Utility Industry, 1954–57.” The American Economic Review, June 1966, pp. 345–347.Google Scholar
[13]Poensgen, D. H. “The Valuation of Convertible Bonds.” Industrial Management Review, Parts I and II, Fall 1965 and Spring 1966.Google Scholar
[14]Pratt, J. “Risk Aversion in the Small and in the Large.” Econometrica, January–April 1964, p. 132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Sharpe, W. F. “Capital Asset Prices: A Theory of Market Equilibrium under Conditions of Risk.” Journal of Finance, September 1964, pp. 425–442.Google Scholar
[16]Tobin, J. “Liquidity Preference As Behavior Toward Risk.” Review of Economic Studies, February 1958, pp. 65–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar