臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

台灣股票市場中，當投資人接收到分析師推薦資訊時，對於所推薦的相似名稱公司股票是否都能夠正確的辨別而不受混淆，這是值得探討的。本研究觀察4組分析師推薦相似公司名稱股票及其配對股票，資料可取得期間由1995年1月1日到2004年6月30日。一方面將名稱相似配對公司樣本期間分為推薦期間與非推薦期間，去分析推薦期間及非推薦期間的報酬率、週轉率、成交量的相關程度是否有差異，以釐清是否是推薦資訊所造成的偏誤。接著，採用事件研究法觀察分析師推薦時，對被推薦公司配對相似公司名稱股票在事件日前後超額報酬、超額交易量及超額週轉率來判別影響的顯著性，最後從散戶較容易受誤導的公司特徵去判斷，探討散戶的偏誤情形是否會更加嚴重。
在推薦事件期間報酬率及週轉率二者相關性顯著較高，表示部分散戶投資人對於分析師推薦相似公司名稱在股價的反應是會受到混淆的，但此混淆並沒有對股票價格基本面產生顯著影響，但在週轉率及成交量方面，可能因預期心理，造成進出市場次數增加。另外也發現散戶投資人對於規模小、股票價格低、成立年度久及散戶持股較多的公司股票受誤導的情形更嚴重。

In Taiwan stock market, it is worth to discuss that whether the investors can tell similar corporate names of stocks correctly when they receive the recommendation message from stock analysts. The sample data adopted by this study include the daily performance such as returns of stock price, turnover, and trade volume of four pairs of similar corporate-name stocks during the period from January 1, 1995 to June 30, 2004. First, we divide the sample period into two types according to whether the investors can receive recommendation message from analysts, namely recommended period and non-recommended period, and we compare the difference of the correlation between similar corporate name stock data in the two types of periods. Then, we use the event study to explore the correlation between the performance of the recommended stock and the stock with a similar corporate name as the recommended one during the pre-recommended period. And then, we want to examine whether the correlation between similar corporate name stocks is more significant when the recommended stocks with some corporate characteristics preferred by individual investors, such as small scale.
The empirical result shows that the correlation of returns of stock price with similar corporate names is more significant during the recommended period, and indicates that individual investors would be confused about the recommendation message from analysts. However, the confusion has no influence on the fundamentals of stock price. Both the correlations of turnover and trade volume of stocks with similar corporate names are also significant. This might be because individual investors have expectation of stock price due to recommendation message, and they tend to increase the frequency of buying and selling stocks. Moreover, the correlation between similar corporate name stocks is more significant when the recommended stocks have some corporate characteristics such as small scale, low stock price, older corporate age, and more stock share of individual investors.

目錄
目錄 I
圖表目錄 II
第一章　緒論 1
第一節　研究背景與動機 1
第二節　研究目的 2
第三節　研究限制 3
第四節　研究架構與流程 3
第二章　文獻回顧與探討 5
第一節　不同於效率市場理論的行為財務學 5
第二節　機構投資人與散戶投資人的差異 5
第三節　雜訊交易相關文獻 8
第四節　公司名稱相關文獻 9
第五節　小結 12
第三章　樣本描述與研究方法 14
第一節　樣本及研究期間 14
第二節　敘述統計 16
第三節　研究方法 19
第四章　實證結果與分析 21
第一節　相關係數 21
第二節　分析師推薦對累積異常報酬與異常交易量的影響 30
第三節　相似名稱公司的市場特徵對雜訊交易者持股的影響 40
第五章 結論與建議 42
第一節　研究結論 42
第二節　給投資人的建議 43
第三節　未來研究建議 45
參考文獻 46

圖表目錄
【圖1-1】研究架構與流程 4
【表3-1】實驗組基本資料 15
【表3-2】實驗組及控制組對照表 16
【表3-3】實驗組與控制組在報酬率和交易量之敘述性統計量 17
【表3-4】相似名稱公司股票特徵因素比較 18
【表4-1】實驗組與控制組 ( 1對 1) 之間的相關係數 23
【表4-2】實驗組和自身市場及對方市場(1對1)之間的相關係數 24
【表4-3】樣本推薦次數及期間分佈 25
【表4-4】被推薦股票與相似名稱股票及相似名稱配對股票之報酬相關性 27
【表4-5】被推薦股票與相似名稱股票及相似名稱配對股票之週轉率相關性 28
【表4-6】被推薦股票與相似名稱股票及相似名稱配對股票之成交量相關性 29
【表4-7】第一組配對樣本長鴻及長虹平均異常報酬及累積異常報酬 31
【表4-8】第二組配對樣本高林及高林股平均異常報酬及累積異常報酬 33
【表4-9】第三組配對樣本大成及大成鋼平均異常報酬及累積異常報酬 34
【表4-10】第四組聯華(聯華實)及聯華食平均超額異常報酬及累積超額報酬 35
【表4-11】第一組配對樣本長鴻及長虹平均超額交易量及平均超額週轉率 36
【表4-12】第二組配對樣本高林及高林股平均超額交易量及平均超額週轉率 37
【表4-13】第三組配對樣本大成及大成鋼平均超額交易量及平均超額週轉率 38
【表4-14】第四組聯華(聯華實)及聯華食平均超額交易量及平均超額週轉率 39
【表4-15】被推薦股票與相似名稱股票及相似名稱配對股票之特徵比較 41

中文部分：
1.林有志、林郁慧，2004，分析師對應計項目持續性認知之研究，會計與公司治理，第一卷第一期，25-45頁。
2李又剛、陳鉉文，1997，加強法人投資比重後對國內股市投資風氣之影響，企銀季刊，第十九卷第一期，94-106頁。
3.楊世安，2006，美加證券市場對石油相關公司改名的反應，國立政治大學財務管理研究所碩士論文。
4.黃鉦堤，1988，臺灣股票市場資訊差異對股價影響之研究，中山大學企管所碩士論文。
5.黃敏助，1993，論健全我國證券市場之道，證券發展季刊，第19期，1-8頁。
6.黃德芬，1995，台灣股票市場波動性之研究，證券市場發展季刊，第7卷，第4期，第157-183頁。
7.黃泳華，1997，大眾媒體推薦股票、自營商買賣超之資訊內涵及其與會計資訊相關性之研究，國立政治大學會計研究所碩士論文。
8.陳隆麒、翁霓、郭敏華，1995，雜訊交易對臺灣地區投資人行為及股價之影響，證券市場發展季刊，第七卷，第一期，第101-124頁。
9.陳一如，2005，分析師提供投資訊息的價值：行為財務學的觀點，中華管理評論
國際學報，第八卷第一期。
10.拾已寰，1991，台灣股票市場機構投資人與小額投資人投資策略差異性之研究，證券市場發展季刊，第十二期，第65-89頁。
11.施生元，2001，投信、外資及散戶從眾行為之探討，元智大學管理研究所碩士論文。


英文部份：
1. Bosch, Jean-Claude, and Mark Hirschey, 1989, “The Valuation Effects of Corporate Name Changes,” Financial Management 18, 64-73.
2. Black, F., 1986, “Noise,” Journal of Finance 41, 529-543.
3. Barber, B. M., Y. T. Lee, Y. J. Liu and T.Odean, 2005, “Who Loses From Trade? Evidence from Taiwan, ” working papte, Haas School of Business, UC Berkeley.
4.Barber, Brad M., Terrance Odean, and Ning Zhu, 2006, “Systematic Noise, ” working paper, University of California at Davis.
5.Chen, H., Noronha, G., Singal, V. ,2004, “The price response to S&P 500 index additions and deletions: Evidence of asymmetry and a new explanation, ” Journal of Finance, 59 (4), 1901-1929.
6. Cooper, M. J., O. Dimitrov, and Rau, P. R., 2001, “A Rose.com by Any Other Name,” The Journal of Finance 56, 2371-2388.
7. Cooper, M. J., A. Khorana, I. Osobov, A. Patel, and P. R. Rau, 2005, “Managerial Actions in Response to a Market Downturn: Valuation Effects of Name Changes in the dot.com Decline,” Journal of Corporate Finance 11, 319-335.
8. DeLong, J. Bradford, Andrei Shleifer, Lawrence H. Summers, and Robert J. Waldmann, 1990, “Noise Trader Risk in Financial Markets,” Journal of Political Economy 98, 703–738.
9. Ewing, Terzah, 1999, “Stock Snafu Hits Traders on Internet. The Wall Street Journal,
C1.
10. Fama, E. F., 1970, “Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical
Work,” The Journal of Finance 25, 383-417.
11. Fama, E.F. ,1965, “The behavior of stock market prices,” Journal of Business 38 , 34-106.
12. Frieder, Laura, and Avanidhar Subrahmanyam, 2005, “Brand Perceptions and the Market for Common Stock,” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 40, 57-85.
13.French, K. R., & Roll, R.,1986, “Stock return varinence: The arrival of information and the reaction of traders. Journal of Financial Economics, 17(1), 5-26.
14.Granger, C. W. J. and O.Morgenstern, 1970, “Predictability of Stock Market Prices,” D.C.Heath and Co., Lexington, MA. .
15. Kent, R., and C. Allen, 1994, “Competitive Interference Effects in Consumer Memory for Advertising: The Role of Brand Familiarity,” Journal of Marketing 58, 97-105.
16. Kadapakkam, Palani-Rajan and Lalatendu, Misra, 2007, “What’s in a Nickname? Price and Volume Effects of a Pure Ticker Symbol Change,” The Journal of Financial Research 30 53-71.
17. Moyer, R. C., Chatfield, R. E., & Sisneros, P. M. ,1989, “Security analyst monitoring activity:Agency costs and information demands. ,” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis,24(4), 503-512.
18. Oldfield, G., and R. Rogalski., 1980, “Theory of Common Stock Returns Over Trading and Non-trading Periods, ,” Journal of Finance 35, 729-751.
19. Lee, P. M., 2001, “What’s in a Name.com?: The Effects of ‘.com’ Name Changes on Stock Prices and Trading Activity,” Strategic Management Journal 22, 793-804.
20. Lakonishok, Josef, Andrei Shleifer, and Robert Vishny, 1994, “Contrarian Investment, Extrapo-lation, and Risk,” Journal of Finance 49, 1541–1578.
21. Lynch-Koski, J., Rice, E. M. and A. Tarhouni, 2004, “Noise Trading and Volatility:
Evidence from Day Trading and Message Boards,” Working paper, University of
Washington.
22. Laffont, J.-J. and E. S. Maskin, 1990, The Efficient Market Hypothesis and Insider Trading on the Stock Market, Journal of Political Economy, 98, 1, 70-93.
23. Odean, T., 1998a. Are investors reluctant to realize their losses? Journal of Finance 53, 1775-1798.
24. Rashes, M. S., 2001, “Massively Confused Investors Making Conspicuously Ignorant Choices (MCI–MCIC),” The Journal of Finance 56, 1911–1927.
25. Shiller, R.J., 1984. “Stock Prices and Social Dynamics,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2, 457-498.
26. Shiller, R.J., 1999. “Human Behavior and the Efficiency of the Financial System, ” in J. Taylor, and M. Woodford, ed.
27.Shleifer, A., and R. Vishny, 1997, “A survey of corporate governance,” Journal of Finance 52, 737-783.
28. Thaler, R. H., 1999, “The End of Behavioral Finance. ” Financial Analysts Journal, 55(6), 12-17.