Search results

The recommendation of the analyst report is not only limited to a small number of ratings, but also biased toward a buy opinion with the absence of sell opinion. As an alternative to this, this paper aims to extract analysts' textual opinions embedded in the report body through text analysis and examine the profitability of investment strategies. Analyst opinion about a firm is measured by calculating the frequency of positive and negative words in the report text through the Korean sentiment lexicon for finance (KOSELF). To verify the usefulness of textual opinions, the author constructs a calendar-time based portfolios by the analysts' textual opinion variable of each stock. When opinion level is used, investment strategy has no significant hedged portfolio return. However, hedged portfolio constructed by opinion change shows significant return of 0.117% per day (2.57% per month). In addition, the hedged return increases to 0.163% per day (3.59% per month) when the opening price is used instead of closing price. This study show that the analysts’ opinion extracted from text analysis contains more detailed spectrum than recommendation and investment strategies using them give significant returns.

Scholars of persuasion have long made a distinction between appeals to logic, emotion and authority- logos, ethos and pathos- but ideas developed to account for live face-to-face conversation processes must also be tested in new media. We aimed to test the effectiveness of these three strategies in one-to-one chats through different communication media.

With a 3 × 3 × 2 between-subject factorial design, we tested these three strategies in one-to-one chats (female–female or male–male pairs) through three communication media: face-to-face, Skype video or Skype text. The persuasion scenario was adapted from prior studies in which students were presented with the idea of requiring a comprehensive exam as part of their degree. The participants were all undergraduate students of a major university in USA.

Our results showed trivial differences between female–female and male–male conditions. The logos appeal worked best overall in persuading the participants to change their reported attitudes. Additionally, the explanations provided by the participants for their own opinions were most like the persuasion scripts in the logos condition compared to the other two appeal conditions. Separately, participants indicated some disapproval of the pathos appeal in the text-based chat condition, although this did not seem to make a difference in terms of actual attitude change.

One major limitation of our study is that our subjects are college students and therefore are not representative of Internet users in general. Future research should test these three types of persuasion strategies on people of diverse backgrounds. For example, while logos seems to be most effective strategy in persuading college students (at least in our study), pathos or ethos may be more effective when one attempts to persuade people of different backgrounds.

Although it is enough for a statistical test, our sample size is still relatively small due to constraints on time, personnel and funding. We also recognize that it is challenging both conceptually and empirically to compare the effectiveness of three persuasion strategies separately.

Our findings suggest it is helpful to use fact-checking tools to combat disinformation in cases where users may not have sufficient domain knowledge or may not realize the need to identify or examine the given information. Additionally, it may require more effort to negate the impact of the disinformation spread than correcting the information, as some users may not only believe false information but also may start to reason in ways similar to those presented in the disinformation messages.

Past studies on online persuasion have limitedly examined whether and how communication media and persuasion strategies interact in one-to-one persuasion sessions. Our experiment makes an attempt to close this gap by examining the persuasion process and outcome in three different communication media and with three different persuasion strategies.

This study explores the motivations for sharing personal information and self-disclosure by mentally ill people in public and private Facebook groups. The purpose of the self-disclosure comparison between public and private groups is to understand how mentally ill people use different kinds of online communication channels in order to advance their goals and needs concerning their illness.

The study was carried out using questionnaires distributed in Facebook groups for people with mental illnesses. A total of 123 full and valid questionnaires were received. Statistical analysis was performed on the data.

Findings revealed that there are no significant differences between public and private groups concerning motivations for self-disclosure and that both types of groups create a safe and supportive place for mentally ill people. However, findings suggest that participants in public groups tend to display higher social involvement than those who participate in private groups.

This is a path breaking study on the entire subject of discourse of people with mental illnesses in private Facebook groups and its importance is derived from this. The study clarified and emphasized the importance of the sense of belonging to a community. Moreover, findings encourage people with mental illnesses to make use of social media channels to meet their social and personal needs.

The paper attempts to construct a novel multi-objective grey hierarchical group consensus approach to deal with the group consensus problems consisting of hierarchical relationship and non-cooperative behaviors among decision makers (DMs).

To deal with these group consensus problems consisting of hierarchical relationship and non-cooperative behaviors among DMs non-cooperative behavior in uncertain information systems, considering the influence of coordination cost and the degree of group consensus, based on the idea of grey situation decision-making, the authors establish a multi-objective grey hierarchical group consensus model, and design different invalid decision elimination rules for decision-making groups of different sizes, and use a case verifies the effectiveness and feasibility of the model.

With the continuous improvement of the coordination cost budget, the degree of consensus of all departments and the overall consensus tend to be stable, and will no longer change with the increase of the coordination cost budget. The cost required by each department is basically consistent with the response trend of the cost required to coordinate the overall situation to the pre-set lower limit of group consensus.

The proposed approach can succeed in identifying DMs' information, and mine the DMs' information and help make a relatively more scientific decision.

This study aims to investigate replies to the top 10 comments under Always “Like a Girl” YouTube femvertising video to gauge consumers’ responses regarding femvertising as well as relationships among commenters.

This study adopted a mixed research methods design. A user analysis and a qualitative content analysis were conducted to examine the replies of the top 10 comments with the most replies to reveal not only the topics but also relationships and patterns among those comments and commenters.

The user analysis found that across all the 10 comment-and-reply units, in 8 units, the user of the original primary comment, the conversation starter, was also the user who was targeted most often. The qualitative content analysis revealed four themes from the 10 comment-and-reply units: multilayered emotional responses, a gendered society, complex coexisting relationships and a melting pot.

The findings of this research offer significant extensions to the understanding of public sphere theory within the contemporary digital media landscape. By analyzing the nature of replies to digital advertisements, the study illuminates how various types of user engagement–whether it be inquiry, laudation, debate, or flame–play a critical role in shaping the digital public sphere.

The study underscores the importance for marketers to scrutinize both comments and replies to effectively utilize femvertising on social media, particularly YouTube. By understanding the emotional dynamics of user interactions, marketers can craft strategies that evoke positive responses and mitigate negative ones. Engaging with users who are open to changing their views or mediating discussions can also be beneficial, as can the use of AI tools to maintain focus on the content rather than on individual commenters. Such approaches can enhance the perception of femvertising campaigns and foster a more constructive dialogue within the social media space.

This study contributes to the literature by investigating the replies of comments, interactions, relationships and patterns among YouTube commenters that may generate valuable insights for advertisers and marketers to be aware of the possible issues and monitor the sentiment of commentaries, thus, developing effective strategies to better connect with consumers. This extends the understanding of public sphere theory in the contemporary digital media landscape.

The purpose of this paper is to examine students’ attitudes toward sustainable dining. It aims to identify the level of importance that students place on specific on-campus sustainable dining initiatives and the factors that affect their attitudes and behaviors.

A random sample of 197 undergraduate students completed an online survey in the spring semester of 2020. The survey was divided into four sections: demographic and background information; familiarity with on-campus dining, specifically with sustainable on-campus dining initiatives; the level of importance placed on these sustainable practices; and practiced sustainable behaviors.

Many students placed a high level of importance on common sustainable dining behaviors and practices such as recycling, waste reduction techniques and the use of eco-friendly utensils. Sex was found to be a significant factor in determining students’ attitudes and behaviors. While men had a higher level of knowledge of on-campus sustainable practices at the dining facilities, women consistently placed a higher level of importance on almost all sustainable dining practices. Additionally, the study also found that signage was not an effective method of influencing behavior.

Previous studies that have explored this topic have been limited. Additional research is needed to ascertain if better knowledge of on-campus sustainable dining initiatives can influence students’ inclinations to act more sustainably.

This article aims to elaborate the context-sensitive nature of credibility assessment by examining how such judgments are made in online discussion in times of uncertainty caused by Finland's intent to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in spring 2022.

The empirical findings draw on the qualitative content analysis of 3,324 posts submitted to a Finnish online discussion in February–March 2022. It was examined how the participants of online discussion assess the credibility of information sources referred to in debates on the NATO membership. It is assumed that the believability of the author of information is indicative of his or her expert power, for example based on the credentials of a scholar, while the credibility of information content, for example the provision of factual evidence is indicative of the source's informational power.

Political decision-makers, particularly the President of Finland were assessed as most credible information sources, due to their access to confidential knowledge and long-time experience in politics. The credibility assessments differed more strongly while judging the believability of researchers. On the one hand, their expertise was praised; on the other hand, doubts were presented about their partiality. Fellow participants of online discussion were assessed most negatively because information sources of these types are associated with low expert and informational power.

As the study concentrated on credibility assessments made in a Finnish online discussion group, the findings cannot be extended to concern the credibility judgments occurring information in other contexts.

The study is among the first to characterize the role of expert and informational power in credibility assessment in times of uncertainty.

Given the popularity of online health communities (OHCs) and medical question-and-answer (Q&A) services, it is increasingly important to understand what constitutes useful answers and user-adopted standards in healthcare domain. However, few studies provide insights into how health information characteristics, provider characteristics and recipient characteristics jointly influence user information adoption decisions. To fill this research gap, this study examines the combined effects of physicians' certainty tone as information characteristics, seniority as provider characteristics and disease severity as recipient characteristics on patients' health information adoption.

Drawing on dual-process theory and information adoption model, an extended information adoption model is established in this study to examine the effect of attitude certainty on patients' health information adoption, and the moderating effects of online seniority and offline seniority, as well as patient motivation level—disease severity. Utilizing logit regression models, the authors empirically tested the hypotheses based on 4,224 Q&A records from a popular Chinese OHC.

The results show that (1) attitude certainty has a significant positive impact on patients' health information adoption, (2) the relationship between attitude certainty and information adoption is negatively moderated by physicians' online seniority, but is positively moderated by offline seniority; (3) there is a negative three-way interaction effect of attitude certainty, online seniority and disease severity on patients' health information adoption.

This study extends the information adoption model to examine the two-way interaction between argument quality and source reliability, as well as the three-way interaction with user motivation level, especially for health information adoption in the healthcare field. These findings also provide direct practical applications for knowledge contributors and OHCs.

With the worldwide open government data (OGD) movement and frequent public health emergencies in recent years, academic research on OGD for public health emergencies has been growing. However, it is not fully understood how to promote OGD on public health emergencies. Therefore, this paper aims to explore the factors that influence OGD on public health emergencies.

The technology–organization–environment framework is applied to explore factors that influence OGD during COVID-19. It is argued that the effects of four key factors – technical capacity, organizational readiness, social attention and top-down pressure – are contingent on the severity of the pandemic. A unique data set was created by combining multiple data sources which include archival government data, a survey of 1,034 Chinese respondents during the COVID-19 outbreak and official COVID-19 reports.

The data analysis indicates that the four factors positively affect OGD, and pandemic severity strengthens the effects of technical capacity, organizational readiness and social attention on OGD.

This study provides theoretical insights regarding how to improve OGD during public health emergencies, which can guide government efforts in sharing data with the public when dealing with outbreak in the future.

Drawing insights from institutional theory, this paper aims to examine whether and to what extent banks have reconfigured their management control systems (MCSs) in response to growing institutional pressures towards sustainability, understood as environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues.

The authors conducted an exploratory study at the three largest Italian banking groups to shed light on changes made in MCSs to account for ESG issues. The analysis is based on 12 semi-structured interviews with managers from the sustainability and controls areas, as well as from other relevant operational areas particularly concerned with the integration process of ESG issues. Additionally, secondary data sources were used. The Malmi and Brown (2008) MCS framework, consisting of a package of five types of formal and informal control mechanisms, was used to structure and analyse the empirical data.

The examined banks widely implemented numerous changes to their MCSs as a response to the heightened sustainability pressures from regulatory bodies and stakeholders. In particular, with the exception of action planning, the results show an extensive integration of ESG issues into the five control mechanisms of Malmi and Brown’s framework, namely, long-term planning, cybernetic, reward/compensation, administrative and cultural controls.

By identifying the approaches banks followed in reconfiguring traditional MCSs, this research sheds light on how adequate MCSs can promote banks’ “sustainable behaviours”. The results can, thus, contribute to defining best practices on how MCSs can be redesigned to support the integration of ESG issues into the banks’ way of doing business.

Overall, the findings support the theoretical assertion that institutional pressures influence the design of banks’ MCSs, and that both formal and informal controls are necessary to ensure a real engagement towards sustainability. More specifically, this study reveals that MCSs, by encompassing both formal and informal controls, are central to enabling banks to appropriately understand, plan and control the transition towards business models fully oriented to the integration of ESG issues. Thereby, this allows banks to effectively respond to the increased stakeholder demands around ESG concerns.