跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.200.82.149) 您好!臺灣時間:2023/06/05 11:31
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:陳乃菁
研究生(外文):Nai-Jing Chen
論文名稱:我國銀行放款行為之研究:心理偏誤觀點
論文名稱(外文):The Lending Behaviors of Banks in Taiwan: The Perspective of Psychological Biases
指導教授:劉永欽劉永欽引用關係
指導教授(外文):Yong-Chin Liu
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:亞洲大學
系所名稱:財務金融學系碩士班
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:財務金融學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2009
畢業學年度:97
語文別:中文
論文頁數:71
中文關鍵詞:行為財務學捷思偏誤損失趨避風險趨避制度性記憶假說
外文關鍵詞:behavioral financeheuristic biasloss aversionrisk aversioninstitutinal memory hypothesis
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:4
  • 點閱點閱:831
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:162
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
本研究以行為財務學的心理偏誤—捷思偏誤和損失/風險趨避—解釋我國銀行的放款行為,檢視高逾放後時間長短與放款標準之關係。放款標準寬緊程度以放款成長率、存放款利差、擔保放款比率及信用卡放款成長率代表之。針對36家本國銀行在2003/06~2008/12的追蹤資料進行迴歸分析,並分為是否上市櫃、新舊及公民營銀行等類別。
研究結果發現:控制其他影響放款供需因素後,不同規模與類別銀行有不同程度的心理偏誤,主要是損失趨避,且表現在放款成長與存放利差決策上。小銀行比大銀行在放款成長和擔保放款行為上有較大心理偏誤;非上市櫃、公營和舊銀行分別比上市櫃、民營和新銀行在存放利差決策上有較高的損失趨避程度。
另外,加入仰賴硬性資訊之放款—信用卡放款—做為應變數,結果發現信用卡放款也出現了損失趨避行為,意謂制度性記憶假說無法完全解釋我國銀行放款行為的循環現象。因此,本國銀行放款行為理性評估風險與報酬抵換關係的程度仍有改善空間。
This paper uses psychological biases in behavioral finance—heuristic bias and loss/risk aversion—to explain the lending behaviors of banks in Taiwan. The relationship between the time following high non-performing loans and loan decisions is examined. This paper employs loan growth rate, loan-deposit interest rate spread, and collateral loan-to-total loan ratio to measure loan decision criterions. The sample is 36 banks with the period between June, 2003 and December, 2008, and panel data is analyzed by regression method. Sample banks are categorized by three rules, which are whether the stocks are publicly traded, nation-owned vs. privately-owned, and new vs. old banks. The findings are as follows. After controlling the other factors affecting loan supply and demand, there are distinctive psychological biases between both banks with different sizes and types. This bias is mainly loss/risk aversion and exhibited in the decisions of both loan growth and interest rate spread. Banks with small size have higher irrational biases than those with big size for both decisions on loan growth and collateral loan ratio. Non-publicly-traded, nation-owned, and old banks have higher loss aversion biases than publicly-traded, privately-owned, and new ones, respectively. Thus, the institutional memory hypothesis is unable to completely explain the pocyclical behaviors of lendings, and the degree of rational for loan behaviors of sample banks in Taiwan should be improved.
中文摘要 I
英文摘要 II
目錄 III
表目錄 V
圖目錄 VII
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機與目的 1
第二節 研究架構 4
第二章 文獻探討 6
第一節 放款行為的循環 6
第二節 易取性捷思 8
第三節 損失或風險趨避 9
第四節 放款風險溢酬 11
第五節 擔保放款 15
第三章 研究設計 17
第一節 研究假說 17
第二節 樣本與資料 19
第三節 研究方法 20
第四章 實證結果 27
第一節 相關係數矩陣分析 27
第二節 敘述統計量 30
第三節 迴歸分析 35
第五章 結論 55
參考文獻 57
附錄A 表列控制變數之迴歸結果—90百分位數 61
附錄B 表列控制變數之迴歸結果—最高點 65
附錄C 表列控制變數之信用卡迴歸結果 69
1.俞海琴,1992,由擔保品與借款者風險看本國銀行放款市場資訊是否對稱,「企銀季刊」,第十六卷第二期,頁1-9。
2.陳安琳、李文智和周士雄,1999,銀行存放款利率差距因素之研究,「中華管理評論」,第二卷第六期,頁1-16。
3.陳佩焜,2005,「本國銀行擴大授信降低逾期放款比率之確定效果研究」,國立台北大學國際財務金融碩士在職專班。
4.陳家彬,1998,台灣地區銀行存款利率決定因素之探討,「管理評論」,第十七卷第三期,頁85-109。
5.陳家彬和賴怡洵,2000,台灣地區銀行放款訂價:理論與新舊銀行之實證比較,「管理學報」,第十七卷第三期,頁415-440。
6.郭敏華,2008,「行為財務學:當財務學遇上心理學」,台北市,智勝文化事業有限公司。
7.陳錦村,1998,競爭、往來關係與銀行授信行為之研究,「中國財務學刊」,第五卷第三期,頁61-90。
8.劉永欽,2008,公司經營行為之賭資效應與損益兩平效應,「財務金融學刊」,即將刊登。
9.歐陽秀宜、陳軒儀譯,Michael M. Pompian著,2008,「行為財務學與財富管理」,台灣金融研訓院。
10.Barro, R.J., 1976, The Loan Market, Collatetral, and the rate of interest, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 8, pp. 439-456.
11.Berger, A.N. and G. F. Udell, 2002, Small business credit availability and relationship lending: The importance of bank organizational structure, Econ. J, 112, pp. 32-53.
12.Berger, A.N. and G.F. Udell, 2004, The institutional memory hypothesis and the procyclicality of bank lending behavior, Journal of Financial Intermediation, 13, pp. 458-495.
13.Besanko, D. and A.V. Thakor, 1987, Collateral and rationing: Sorting equilibria in Monopolistic and Competitive credit markets, International Economic Review, 28, pp. 671-689.
14.Booth, J.R., 1992, Contract costs, bank loans, and the cross-monitoring hypothesis, Journal of Financial Economics, 31, pp. 25-41.
15.Borio, C., C. Furfine and P. Lowe, 2001, Procyclicality of the financial system and financial stability: Issues and policy options, in Marrying the macro- and micro-prudential dimensions of financial stability, BIS Papers, 1, pp. 1-57.
16.Chan, Y.S. and G. Kanatas, 1985, Asymmetric valuations and the role of collateral in loan agreements, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 17, pp. 84-95.
17.Chen, S., G.H.H. Yeo and K.W. Ho, 1998, Further evidence on the determinants of secured versus unsecured loans, Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 25, pp. 371-385.
18.Fama, Eugene F. and Michael Jensen, 1983a, Agency problems and residual claims, Journal of Low and Economics, 26, pp. 327-349.
19.Fama, Eugene F. and Michael Jensen, 1983b, Separation of ownership and control, Journal of Low and Economics, 26, pp. 301-325.
20.Fischhoff, B., P. Slovic, and S. Lichtenstein, 1977, Knowing with uncertainty: The appropriateness of extreme confidence, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1, pp. 288-299.
21.Hempel, G.H. and D.G. Simonson, 1999, Bank Management: Text and Cases, 5thed., Wiley.
22.Ho, T.S.Y. and A. Saunders, 1981, The determinants of bank interest margins: Theory and empirical evidence, Journal of Financial & Quantitative Analysis, 16, pp. 581-600.
23.Horvath, E., 2002, Lending booms, credit risk and the dynamic provisioning system, In: Studies on the Procyclical Behaviour of Banks, National Bank of Hungary Occasional Papers #10. http://www.mnb.hu/english/
24.Ikenberry, D., J. Lakonishok and T. Vermaelen, 1995, Market underreaction to open market share repurchase, Journal of Financial Economics, 39, pp. 181-208.
25.Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky, 1979, Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk, Econometrica, 47, pp. 263-291.
26.Leeth, J.D. and J.A. Scott, 1989, The incidence of secured debt: Evidence from the small business community, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 24, pp. 379-394.
27.McShane, R.W. and I.G. Sharpe, 1985, A time series/cross section analysis of the determinants of Australian trading bank loan/deposit interest margins: 1962-1981, Journal of Banking & Finance, 9, pp. 115-136.
28.Montier, J., 2002, Behavioral Finance—Insight into Irrational Minds and Markets, John Wiley & Sons Ltd., England.
29.Morsman, E., 1986, Jr., Commercial loan structuring, Journal of Commercial Bank Lending, 68, pp. 2-20.
30.Odean, T., 1999, Do investors trade too much? American Economic Review, 89, pp. 1279-1298.
31.Petersen, M. A. and R. G. Rajan, 1994, The benefits of lending relationship: Evidence from small business data, Journal of Finance, 49, pp. 3-37.
32.Shefrin, 2007, Behavioral Corporate Finance: Decisions That Create Value, McGraw Hill.
33.Shefrin, H. and M. Statman, 1985, The disposition to sell winners too early and ride losers too long: Theory and evidence, Journal of Finance, 40, pp. 777-790.
34.Stein, J.C., 2002, Information production and capital allocation: Decentralized vs. hierarchical firms, Journal of Finance, 57, pp. 1891-1921.
35.Stiglitz, J.E. and A. Weiss, 1981, Credit rationing in markets with imperfect information, American Economic Review, 71, pp. 393-410.
36.Stiglitz, J.E. and A. Weiss, 1983, Incentive effects of terminations: Applications to the credit and labor markets, American Economic Review, 73, pp. 912-927.
37.Tverskey, A. and D. Kahneman, 1974, Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases, Science, 185, pp. 1124-1131.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top