I. Introduction, 138. — II. Outline of Arrow's model and results, 138. — III. Public goods, 139. — IV. Expenditures as produced commodities, 140. — V. Examples, 142. — VI. Conclusion, 144.

This paper formulates the notion of stochastic equilibria as invariant probability distributions consistent with the behavior patterns of individuals and the disequilibrium adjustment mechanism of the economy. Conditions for existence, uniqueness, and stability of such equilibria are examined. WE CONSIDER A CLASS of problems in this paper in which the economic environment is stochastic. We will be concerned primarily with developing an equilibrium concept for general equilibrium models of this type. However the essential ideas can be carried over directly to partial equilibrium applications. The choice of the specific general equilibrium model used results primarily from a desire to facilitate comparisons with earlier work on alternative equilibrium concepts for this model (see Hildenbrand [9] and Majumdar and Bhattacharya [2 and 3]). Randomness can arise from several sources. We will be considering, for concreteness, a simple exchange economy in which the basic data are the preferences and endowments of the economic agents. Either of these can be random. Typically, randomness of endowments can be allowed for by creating contingent markets in which case the Arrow-Debreu deterministic equilibrium suffices. It is conceptually much more difficult to create markets contingent on tastes due to the difficulties of discovering the true taste pattern of an individual, difficulties which do not arise in the case of endowment vectors which can be observed directly. We will be considering an economy without markets for every future contingency and thus there will remain some randomness. This residual uncertainty in the economy necessitates equilibrium concepts other than the Arrow-Debreu system of market clearing prices. 2. NOTATION

Reviews the book "Disclosure of Forecasts."

Reviews the book "Accounting for Management Control: An Introduction," 3rd ed., by Charles T. Horngren.

The evidence of a need for subjective probabilities exists in the accounting literature. Control theory uses subjective probabilities. Depreciation accounting and human resource accounting need these probabilities. Confidence intervals for financial statements may be a type of subjective probability distribution. Accounting experimental researchers have obtained subjective probability responses from their subjects. Accountants, as information evaluators, must be able to express their own subjective probabilities as well as utilize the subjective probabilities of others. The purpose of this article is to explore the research that has been undertaken to obtain the available evidence concerning the theory of how to elicit subjective probabilities in order to help satisfy the expressed need. The theory and research findings will follow a brief review of the nature of probabilities. The type of elicitation techniques used and their effects, the subject's knowledge effects, the conservatism on group elicitation are presented in the sections that follow.

Presents a reply to Imhoff's commentary on the study of the extent to which firms appear to smooth reported income, or practice income smoothing. Objective in the paper; Selection of discretionary expenses; Comments on Imhoff's discussion of the accounting implications of the manipulation of income; How smoothing affects the value of the firm.

Presents a letter to the editor about price-level restated accounting and the measurement of inflation gains and losses.

The article comments on various studies related to the effects of restating financial statements for price-level changes. The three behavioral studies referenced all presented "decision makers" with different sets of data and attempted to infer the effect of these presentations on investment-related decision behavior. The author's study finds that different information sets produced different decisions as to investment preferences. To evaluate the importance of these differences one must evaluate the behavioral research. First, the author lists the differences among the three studies of decision behavior at the individual level that are important in evaluating the conclusions reached. The discussion then turns to a detailed examination of the experimental designs used, together with their inherent limitations. The discussion of design concentrates on the subject-selection process and the subject's task assignment. There are those who would argue that the question of whether or not to restate financial reports for price-level changes is only a question of logic or theory. An accountant's assumption of a stable measuring unit, the dollar, is clearly not met, and, subject to obtaining the best measure of this change, logic dictates that the measure should be corrected.

R. Burr Porter, Roger P. Bey, David C. Lewis, The Development of a Mean-Semivariance Approach to Capital Budgeting, The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 10, No. 4, 1975 Proceedings (Nov., 1975), pp. 639-649

Journal Article Optimal Aggregative Development of a Skilled Work Force Get access R. Manning R. Manning University of Canterbury, Christchurch New Zealand Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Volume 89, Issue 3, August 1975, Pages 504–511, https://doi.org/10.2307/1885271 Published: 01 August 1975