3.9 Article

Lottery preference and stock market participation: evidence from China

期刊

CHINA FINANCE REVIEW INTERNATIONAL
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 46-62

出版社

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/CFRI-01-2021-0008

关键词

Lottery preference; Gambling preference; Stock market participation; Baidu index; G00; G10; H31

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper examines the effects of lottery preference on stock market participation at the macro level and finds that lottery preference increases people's propensity to enter and trade in the stock market, with high lottery preference having a more significant impact on trading behavior. However, lottery preference has no significant effect on stockholding.
Purpose This paper studies the effects of lottery preference on stock market participation at the macro level. Design/methodology/approach The authors use the abnormal search volume intensity for lottery-related keywords from the Baidu search engine to capture retail investors' lottery preference. To measure stock market participation, they use five different macro-level measures from various angles. They perform the time series regression analysis in their empirical study. Findings First, the validation tests show that the lottery preference index in this study is reasonable. Further, the authors find that lottery preference increases people's propensity to enter and trade in the stock market. Besides, they find that the effect on trading behavior is asymmetric, that is, high lottery preference has a more significant impact on trading behavior than low lottery preference. However, lottery preference has no significant effect on the stockholding. Originality/value This paper contributes to the growing literature that examines the determinants of stock market participation and the role of lottery/gambling preference in the financial market. It also provides direct and novel evidence for Statman's (2002) conclusions about the similarity of lottery players and stock traders.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据