Firms invest significant resources to improve the quality of their products but also to communicate to consumers about their efforts. However, information regarding quality of product offerings is now increasingly being generated by short or long term users of products or services. The growing popularity of critical reviews has prompted attention from both academics and practitioners alike. Current academic findings do not seem conclusive with respect to the impact critical reviews have on product performance on the market. The current dissertation aims to clarify the role critical reviews have in relation to economic outcomes such as sales, category market share, price premiums and product success. Using four years of cross-sectional data from the automobile market, the first essay of this dissertation conceptualizes consumer and expert ratings as market-based signals and investigates the impact critical reviews have on product performance of new and used automobiles. Results show that both consumer and expert ratings are positively related to market performance (sales and category market share of new automobiles) but they exhibit a non-synergistic interaction. More specifically, at higher levels of consumer ratings, the impact of expert ratings on product performance is decreased and viceversa. Furthermore, results show that critical ratings are significantly associated with the firm's ability to command higher price premiums. Comparatively, a firm-based driver of product performance, product improvement failed to show a significant association with product market performance but it exhibited a non-linear relationship with price premiums. Moreover, the impact of expert ratings proved to be significantly higher for utilitarian products than hedonic products whereas consumer ratings do not have a differential effect across product types. Finally, the results did not show that the impact of consumer ratings on sales of used automobiles is increasing over time. The second essay focuses on expert reviews (entertainment critics) and provides a more nuanced examination of the role of critics and critical reviews and their impact on probability of product success. Based on qualitative data, two types of expert reviews are distinguished to be influential (opinions and evaluations), however, their role differs in importance over time. The hypotheses are tested using data from the fourth season of American Idol. Results show that on average, opinions are significantly impacting the probability of success whereas evaluations do not. Moreover, the numbers of statements that contain evaluation negatively impact the success in early periods. Overall, the results highlight the facts that critical reviews from both experts and consumers should be monitored, that they are a key driver of product market-success and that select expert reviews may influence product success in early stages of product existence.

No description available.

In recent years, the impact of the permanently reinvested earnings (PRE) assertion on the financial reporting environment has grown tremendously. Under Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 740, a firm making the PRE assertion is able to avoid recognizing residual U.S. taxes on earnings of its foreign subsidiaries so long as it reinvests those earnings outside of the U.S. Suboptimal reinvestment is a potential consequence for PRE-asserting firms due to limited reinvestment opportunities abroad. Suboptimal foreign reinvestment, typically high amounts of reinvestment in financial assets, may be viewed negatively by financial statement users, particularly those users concerned with the default risk of a firm. The disclosure of PRE-related information varies substantially and the actual degree of compliance with this accounting standard has been questioned by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). While firms may believe it is advantageous to obscure their PRE-related activity due to media or political concerns, recent academic literature has highlighted a negative relation between disclosure quality in financial statements and credit risk. The purpose of this study is to examine the relations among foreign reinvestment strategy, PRE disclosure, and long-term credit ratings. First, I examine the direct effect of a firm's reinvestment strategy on its long-term credit rating. Second, I investigate the relation between a firm's reinvestment strategy and its choice to disclose PRE-related information. Third, I study the relation between a firm's choice to disclose PRE-related information and its long-term credit rating. Finally, I examine the potential attenuating effect of the PRE disclosure on the negative relation between financial reinvestment and credit ratings. Using hand collected PRE data for Fortune 500 firms from 1997-2010, I find a negative relation between the intensity of a firm's reinvestment in financial assets and its (1) long-term credit rating and (2) choice to disclose PRE-related information. Furthermore, I find a positive relation between a firm's choice to disclose PRE and its credit rating. / Ph. D.

Despite the meaningful impact that credit ratings have on sovereign countries and financial markets, research has not fully explored the determinants of these ratings in many emerging markets (EMs). The aim of this study was to identify and quantify the extent to which different macroeconomic factors impact sovereign ratings. Based on a review of the literature, an analysis of rating agencies' methodology papers, and economic intuition, it was hypothesised that measures of wealth, economic growth, monetary stability, fiscal trajectory, external accounts and governance would predict EM credit ratings. This hypothesis was largely supported by regression models that anticipated actual ratings with predictive power comparable to extant research, but across a much broader set of EM countries. By identifying the key drivers of these ratings, the current research suggests several areas that policymakers can address to improve their own sovereign ratings. / Economics / M. Com (Economics)

This investigation proposes to employ the use of the mood management theory to examine the role of emotions in the entertainment experience, and how the emotions an audience member experiences while watching a movie can influence their overall ratings of it. Researchers will separate the components of the mood management theory into two experiments: one to explore how the difference in the experience of positive and negative affect influences audience ratings and the other to explore how the degree to which an individual experiences positive emotion influences their ratings for a movie. Using two movies of differing quality, researchers will measure the experience of emotion in participants and examine how it influences their ratings of the movie they watched. Researchers should expect to find significantly higher results across the board from participants who watched the movie Argo, which would indicate that higher quality movies adhere to the mood management theory in that they elicit both more instances of positive affect than negative affect and stronger emotional experiences in audience members.

The problem with which this investigation is concerned is that of developing a scale for rating a public school superintendent in Texas in terms of his adherence to selected characteristics of administrative leadership. A secondary problem is to verify the hypothesis that very few schools in Texas, if any, use a rating scale to evaluate the performance of the superintendent. The purpose of this study will be to identify a set of administrative leadership characteristics which are accepted by members of Boards of Trustees, professors of educational leadership, and superintendents.

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the behavioral differences between over- and underachieving mental retardates and to provide an effective way of identifying over- and underachieving mental retardates.

An attempt was made to determine the presence of subjectivity in the appraisal system of a data processing company. Ninety-one clerks were given individual performance ratings by their supervisors, including an overall rating and ratings on seven performance dimensions. A multiple regression performed on these data resulted in a set of empirical weights. Supervisors were also asked to rank the relative importance of each of the seven dimensions to the clerk job. The mean rankings were regarded as apparent weights. A comparison of the empirical and apparent weights led to the conclusion that supervisors were not rating their employees according to what they said was important for successful performance, thus introducing an element of subjectivity into the system.

Title: Compared organizational forms of aerobics Objective: The aim of the work is - based on theoretical knowledge, inquiry and the analysis of competition compositions - to define the characteristics of the most appropriate organizational form of organizing movement compositions in aerobics. Methods: The method used in this work is the description of the theoretical foundations supplemented with my own commentary. I will seek consensus in the organization and evaluation of three selected movement composition competitions in aerobics. The second method will be questioning. I will create a questionnaire which will be supplemented with interviews. Respondents will be chosen from the ranks of trainers, authors of movement compositions that are part of the contest. The third method will be the analysis of three selected competition exercises. Results: The result of the work is the definition of the most appropriate organizational form of organizing competitions in aerobics movement compositions. Keywords: Movement compositions, rules, aerobics , ratings.

This dissertation presents three essays in financial economics with regards to corporate social responsibility and ratings. The first essay develops the first model for the CSR rating agency who has incentives to shirk while the rated firms have incentives to manipulate information through deceptive public relations (greenwash). Depending on the size of the socially responsible investor base and its composition, three possible regimes can be inferred from the model. The first one is where the rating agency is catering to mainly a large group of sophisticated SR investors who compensate the rating agency for the value of information. The second one is where the rating agency is catering to mainly a large group of trusting SR investors who compensate the rating agency for the value of institutional certification. In either of these two regimes, the weight of the large group of SR investors should generate higher market valuations for higher-rated firms that motivate firm managers to perform greenwashing. The third regime is where there are just too few SR investors to justify the effort to produce informative signals and to drive apart market valuations for rated firms. The second essay investigates the empirical predictions of the model described in the first essay. I challenge the conventional wisdom of commercial CSR ratings being informative in a first attempt to understand how this ratings market operates. Using a novel difference-in-difference identification strategy, I show ratings significantly decreased for firms targeted by a regulatory crackdown on informational manipulation that inflates ratings. I find that better environmental ratings predict worse future corporate behavior via a novel set of benchmarks (i.e. penalties, lawsuits, and media coverage) while neither environmental nor social ratings appear to offer incremental predictive value beyond size and other standard firm characteristics. Higher-rated firms are associated with higher market valuations relative to their lower-rated counterparts. My findings point to a world in which the ratings business is primarily catering to a large group of trusting investors who buy ratings not for the value of information but for the value of institutional certification. The third essay examines the ratings of a recently emerged rating agency competitor and find its ratings are of no better predictive quality. I introduce a novel set of measures, `corporate badness (CB) ratings', for corporate environmental and social performance. In contrast to the leading commercial ratings, worse CB ratings correctly predict more future corporate bad behavior out-of-sample. These CB ratings provide a way to study ratings disagreement, which can be used to disentangle greenwashing from the other information contained in the leading commercial CSR ratings.