Search results

This study aims to gain a deep understanding of the process of international commercial terms (Incoterms) selection by small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in Bangladesh and identify the key factors that influence their choices. The study also intends to explore the discrepancy between the literature and the actual industry practice so that policymakers and traders can make more informed decisions in this respect.

The study adopts a mixed methodology. Initially, 20 factors under five principle components were identified by reviewing the literature. The semi-structured one-to-one interview method has been used to gather expert opinions on the factors and to identify the discrepancy between literature and actual industry practices. Finally, eight factors have been identified and surveyed using the best-worst method (BWM) to determine their relative significance or weights in Incoterm selection.

The study has found that government policies, the influence of banks and currency fluctuations are the top three influential factors in selecting Incoterms by SMEs in Bangladesh. As a result, the most commonly used Incoterms are free on board (FOB) for the exporters and cost and freight (CFR) for the importers. However, discrepancies have been identified between the selected and the actual application of the Incoterms.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to identify and analyse the factors that influence the selection of Incoterms by the SMEs in the context of a developing nation. The study has identified the factors from both importers’ and exporters’ perspectives that have not been done by any previous studies. Moreover, this study explores the discrepancies between the agreed Incoterm and the actual industry practices which is a unique contribution to the literature.

This integrative review was conducted to provide an overview of existing research on digital (in)equity and the digital divide in developed countries.

We searched academic and grey literature to identify relevant papers. From 8464 academic articles and 183 grey literature, after two levels of screening, 31 articles and 54 documents were selected, respectively. A thematic analysis was conducted following the steps suggested by Braun and Clarke and results were reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

The results showed that most articles and papers were either from Europe or North America. Studies used a range of research methods, including quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods. The results demonstrated four major dimensions of the digital divide among various vulnerable groups, including digital literacy, affordability, equity-deserving group-sensitive content and availability or access to infrastructure. Among vulnerable groups, low-income people were reported in the majority of the studies followed by older adults, racial and ethnic minorities, newcomers/new immigrants and refugees, Indigenous groups, people with disabilities and women. Most reported barriers included lack of access to the internet, digital skills, language barriers and internet costs.

To the best of our knowledge, there have been limited attempts to thoroughly review the literature to better understand the emerging dimensions of digital equity and the digital divide, identifying major vulnerable populations and their unique barriers and challenges. This review demonstrated that understanding intersectional characteristics (age, gender, disability, race, ethnicity, Indigenous identity and immigration status) and their interconnections is crucial for analyzing the dynamics of digital (in)equity and divide.

This study aims to analyze the existing body of knowledge concentrating on institutional investors’ behavior. It seeks to track how this domain has evolved through collaborative networks, as well as significant contributors, themes and research opportunities for future work.

The present study applies bibliometric analysis to examine the trends in the selected research field, using 446 articles from highly recognized journals indexed in the Scopus database.

The authors discovered that research on institutional investors’ behavior has significantly increased over the past four decades due to academic interest in the topic. This study observed five themes that unite the research in this field: institutional investors and corporate behavior; determinants of institutional investors’ trading patterns and performance; trading activity and its outcomes; herding, causes and consequences; and institutional investment and corporate performance. Moreover, future directions are penned down, such as how institutional investors’ control influences governance disclosures.

This study serves as a guide by mapping and analyzing the intellectual development of the research literature on institutional investors’ behavior. The authors contribute to the knowledge base by providing a solid foundation for further studies.

This paper aims to identify the impacts of sociodemographic covariates on behavioural biases (BB) scores; the psychometric evidence of the BB measurement instruments; and the main BB that influences the decision-making of individual investors.

Papers were retrieved through search using keywords in ten databases. This systematic review is based on 69 peer-reviewed papers, most of which were published between 2017 and 2021. The relevance of the included papers was assessed through the analysis of statistical/psychometric methods used, and content analysis of the BB literature and its sociodemographic correlations.

Overconfidence is higher in men and not related to age. There was no consensus regarding the relationship between BB and other sociodemographic variables. Most measuring instruments are ad hoc, showing ≤ 4 types of psychometric evidence and assessing ≤ 9 BB. Therefore, the findings demonstrate that there is no gold standard instrument for measuring investors’ BB. Furthermore, 37 BB were cited as influencers of individual investors’ decision-making and overconfidence, herding, anchoring, representativeness and loss aversion were the most prevalent.

Considering that very few systematic reviews have been published in the behavioural finance area, this paper highlights the current state-of-the-art and identifies significant gaps in the literature that can be explored by further research.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first systematic review that analyses the psychometric properties of instruments used for individual investors BB assessment.