[This study uses experiments to examine whether individuals' earnings forecasts correctly reflect the time series properties of quarterly earnings, in particular, the positive autocorrelation in seasonal quarterly changes and the negative fourth-order moving average term documented by Brown and Rozeff (1979). We find that individuals' forecasts are sensitive to the magnitude of these time series components; however, individuals typically underweight the moving average term and under- (over-)weight the most recent seasonal quarterly change when it has a strong (weak) effect on future earnings. Individuals also place slightly more weight on quarterly changes when earnings are reported relative to those four quarters prior. These results suggest that the documented stock market under-reaction to quarterly earnings may not hold universally; rather, it may be composed of under-reactions to firms with strong autocorrelation in seasonal changes and over-reactions to firms with weak autocorrelation in seasonal changes.]

We study the mispricing information present in the target prices of US and international analysts. We hypothesize that asymmetry in the value-relevance of the information that managers supply to analysts, combined with asymmetry in the incentives facing analysts to curry favor with managers, leads to analyst-claimed undervaluation being more predictive of future stock returns than analyst-claimed overvaluation. Our empirical tests isolate analyst-claimed mispricing by first removing analysts’ estimates of the cost of equity from the returns implied by target prices and then separating analyst-claimed undervaluation from overvaluation. We find that target prices only predict future returns (at 16 cents to 18 cents on the dollar) when analysts claim undervaluation, not when they claim overvaluation. We also observe that analyst-claimed undervaluation predicts future returns more strongly after firms experience low returns and when macro-driven valuation uncertainty is low.

We study the effects of fiscal policy interventions in a liquidity trap in a model with nominal rigidities and an interest rate rule. In a liquidity trap caused by a self-fulfilling state of low confidence, higher government spending has deflationary effects that reduce the spending multiplier when the zero lower bound is binding. Instead, cuts in marginal labour tax rates are inflationary and become more expansionary when the zero lower bound is binding. These findings contradict a popular view, based on a liquidity trap caused by a fundamental shock such as a taste shock, that higher government spending is inflationary and can therefore be associated with large multipliers at the zero lower bound, while lower marginal tax rates are deflationary and therefore counterproductive.

This article analyses contract cancellation and product return policies in markets in which sellers advise customers about the suitability of their offering. When customers are fully rational, it is optimal for sellers to offer the right to cancel or return on favourable terms. A generous return policy makes the seller's “cheap talk” at the point of sale credible. This observation provides a possible explanation for the excess refund puzzle and also has implications for the management of customer reviews. When customers are credulous, instead, sellers have an incentive to set unfavourable terms to exploit the inflated beliefs they induce in their customers. The imposition of a minimum statutory standard improves welfare and consumer surplus when customers are credulous. In contrast, competition policy reduces contractual inefficiencies with rational customers, but it is not effective with credulous customers.