Research article

Absolute Stock Returns and Trading Volumes: Psychological Insights

  • The present study explores the effect of anchoring on stock trading volumes. I hypothesize that if on the days when the market index rises (falls), a given stock's return is higher (lower) than the market return, potentially perceived as a psychological "anchor", then investors may treat that as a salient event and subsequently increase their trading activity in the stock. Employing a large sample of daily price and trading volume data, I find support for this hypothesis, documenting that average abnormal daily stock trading volumes are significantly higher on the days when absolute daily stock returns are higher than the contemporaneous absolute market returns. This effect is found to be stronger on the days of negative stock and market returns, suggesting that on these days, investors are probably more inclined to treat the market returns as anchors when making their trading decisions. The effect remains significant after controlling for other potentially influential factors, including contemporaneous and lagged actual and absolute stock and market returns, historical stock returns and volatilities, and company-specific events, like earnings announcements and dividend payments.

    Citation: Andrey Kudryavtsev. Absolute Stock Returns and Trading Volumes: Psychological Insights[J]. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2017, 1(2): 186-204. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2017.2.186

    Related Papers:

    [1] Anatoliy Martynyuk, Gani Stamov, Ivanka Stamova, Yulya Martynyuk–Chernienko . On the regularization and matrix Lyapunov functions for fuzzy differential systems with uncertain parameters. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(10): 6089-6119. doi: 10.3934/era.2023310
    [2] Mehmet Ali Özarslan, Ceren Ustaoğlu . Extended incomplete Riemann-Liouville fractional integral operators and related special functions. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(5): 1723-1747. doi: 10.3934/era.2022087
    [3] Yang Song, Beiyan Yang, Jimin Wang . Stability analysis and security control of nonlinear singular semi-Markov jump systems. Electronic Research Archive, 2025, 33(1): 1-25. doi: 10.3934/era.2025001
    [4] Dojin Kim, Sangbeom Park, Jongkyum Kwon . Some identities of degenerate higher-order Daehee polynomials based on λ-umbral calculus. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(6): 3064-3085. doi: 10.3934/era.2023155
    [5] Jin Li, Yongling Cheng . Barycentric rational interpolation method for solving time-dependent fractional convection-diffusion equation. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(7): 4034-4056. doi: 10.3934/era.2023205
    [6] Jin Li, Yongling Cheng . Barycentric rational interpolation method for solving fractional cable equation. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(6): 3649-3665. doi: 10.3934/era.2023185
    [7] Waleed Mohamed Abd-Elhameed, Omar Mazen Alqubori, Abdulrahman Khalid Al-Harbi, Mohammed H. Alharbi, Ahmed Gamal Atta . Generalized third-kind Chebyshev tau approach for treating the time fractional cable problem. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(11): 6200-6224. doi: 10.3934/era.2024288
    [8] ShinJa Jeong, Mi-Young Kim . Computational aspects of the multiscale discontinuous Galerkin method for convection-diffusion-reaction problems. Electronic Research Archive, 2021, 29(2): 1991-2006. doi: 10.3934/era.2020101
    [9] Janthip Jaiprasert, Pattrawut Chansangiam . Exact and least-squares solutions of a generalized Sylvester-transpose matrix equation over generalized quaternions. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(4): 2789-2804. doi: 10.3934/era.2024126
    [10] Xing Zhang, Xiaoyu Jiang, Zhaolin Jiang, Heejung Byun . Algorithms for solving a class of real quasi-symmetric Toeplitz linear systems and its applications. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(4): 1966-1981. doi: 10.3934/era.2023101
  • The present study explores the effect of anchoring on stock trading volumes. I hypothesize that if on the days when the market index rises (falls), a given stock's return is higher (lower) than the market return, potentially perceived as a psychological "anchor", then investors may treat that as a salient event and subsequently increase their trading activity in the stock. Employing a large sample of daily price and trading volume data, I find support for this hypothesis, documenting that average abnormal daily stock trading volumes are significantly higher on the days when absolute daily stock returns are higher than the contemporaneous absolute market returns. This effect is found to be stronger on the days of negative stock and market returns, suggesting that on these days, investors are probably more inclined to treat the market returns as anchors when making their trading decisions. The effect remains significant after controlling for other potentially influential factors, including contemporaneous and lagged actual and absolute stock and market returns, historical stock returns and volatilities, and company-specific events, like earnings announcements and dividend payments.


    The mathematical modelling of biological problems always gains the interest of many researchers. The birth-death process introduced by Yule [1], Feller [2] and Kendall [3], represents a natural theoretical framework of different biological studies. Such studies have various applications as population dynamics, genome evolution and etc.. In this paper, I am interested in studying the asexual reproduction of like-individual (organisms, cells, genome, etc.). Beginning by the classical branching process that describes a large population that consists initially of Ne like haploid individuals. In each succeeding generation with assuming non-overlapping, the population produces asexually like individuals with number N(t). Each one of them may give birth to 0,1,2,, individuals with corresponding probabilities p0,p1,p2, such that kpk=1. The individuals of any generation are independent identically distributed random (i.i.d.r.) numbers. The number of individuals in the n-th generation is denoted by a random variable (r.v.) of a Markov-Type. Kolmogorov [4] mathematically formulated this model in the form of the Fokker-Planck equation, namely

    u(x,t)t=(b(x)u(x,t))xx(a(x)u(x,t))x=Lfpu(x,t),0<x<,t0, (1.1)

    where the indepenedent random variable x represents the size and u(x,t) is a probability density function being subjected to the initial condition u(x,0)=δ(x), and there is no boundary conditions imposed on it. a(x) is the expected number of individuals and b(x) is its variance. Kolmogorov assumed in his derivation of (1.1) that the only restriction imposed on the number of the population size Ne is that it is fixed at any generation.

    Later, Feller [5], assumed that the density function u(x,t) is independent of on the total population size Ne and formulated his exponential growth equation as

    u(x,t)t=γ(xu(x,t))xxα(xu(x,t))x,0<x<,t0, (1.2)

    where α and γ are initially assumed to be constants. This equation is called by Feller [5], the exponential population growth because its expected population size is obtained as

    M(t)=0xu(x,t)dx=Neeαt. (1.3)

    That means M(t) is growing up exponentially. α represents the actual rate of population increase and can be written as α=1tln(M(t)Ne). The variance could be written as

    σ2=2γαM(t)Ne(M(t)Ne1),Ne0,M(t)>N0. (1.4)

    Then according to Feller, the mean and the variance are necessarily proportional to the instantaneous population size N(t). As α>0 the population average increases, as α<0 the population decreases. Feller stated that the analytic unique solution of Eq (1.2) could be written in terms of the Bessel function I1, see for more details [5]. According to Feller, the probability that the population dies out before time t is

    Δ(t)=exp(αNeγ11e1αt),t>>0, (1.5)

    and on the long run, i.e., as t, the probability that there is no individual exists is given as

    Δ={eαNeγ,α>01,α<<0.

    For more details about the difference views between the pioneers of the population genetics researchers and the modern studies, see Ewens [6]. Dutykh [7], give an approximate solution of the classical Feller's Eq (1.2) after replacing the drift term (a(x)u(x,t))x by ((ax+cu(x,t)))x. The author reformulated the equation by the so called Lagrangian or material variables, to avoid the unbounded of its variable coefficients. Masoliver [8] studied the non-stationary classical Feller process with time-varying coefficients. The author obtained the exact probability distribution and prove as Ross proved that the probability density function approaches the Gamma distribution on the long run. Recently, Giorno et al. [9] studied the time-inhomogeneous Feller-Type diffusion process in the population dynamics. The authors calculated the expectation, the moment generating function and the periodicity of the density function of the classical diffusion of the birth-death process with immigration.

    The discrete birth-death process or the so called M/M/1 exponential model, represents a system in which an individual (customer) joins a system for having a specific service with rate λ and the service (leaving or death) rate is μ with λμ<1. The server is serving only one customer at each time instant. The probability of finding m (customers) at any time n at the system has the same meaning of the asexual production being studied by Fokker-Planck and is mathematically formulated by Eq (1.1).

    In this paper, I am interested in proving that the discrete birth-death process, with random birth rate λ and with random death rate μ is mathematically formulated by the same Eq (1.1) as the birth and death rats are linearly growth. I am interested also in studying the approximate solution of Eq (1.1), for many cases. The first case, is to assume that the number of individuals is fixed at any generation. The second case is to assume that the number of individuals are randomly vary from a generation to generation. Finally is to add the memory effects on the diffusion process Eq (1.1) by extending the first order time derivative to the Caputo time-derivative, namely

    CDβ0tu(x,t)=γ(xu(x,t))xxα(xu(x,t))x,0<x<,t0,0<β<1. (1.6)

    I prefer to call this equation the time-fractional linear population growth equation. This is allowed as Eq (1.1) represents a solution of a stochastic process and u(x,t)0,xnu(x,t)0 as x for all nN0, see reference [12] for more details about the extension of partial differential equation to fractional differential equation.

    For this aim, I implement two numerical methods. The first method is the finite difference method and the second is the fourth order compact finite difference method. The Grünwald-Letnikov scheme is utilized to find the the discrete scheme of the Caputo time-fractional operator. Abdel-Rehim, see for example [10,11,12], has successfully used the Grünwald-Letnikov scheme to simulate many time-fractional diffusion equations. Talib et al. [13] used another numerical method based on the operational matrices to find the numerical solutions of time-fractional differential equations. The authors used the Caputo and the Riemann-Liouville of two-parametric orthogonal shifted Jaccobi polynomials. Talib et al. [14] has recently generalized the existing operational matrix method to operational matrix of mixed partial derivative terms in Caputo sense. In this improvement, the authors used the orthogonal shifted Legendre polynomials.

    It is worth to say that Polito et al.[15] studied a fractional birth-death process. The authors presented in their paper a subordination relationship connected the fractional birth-death process with the classical birth-death process. Later Polito [16] studied the generalized Yule models. Recently, Ascion et al. [17] studied some non-local diffusion-differential equations related to the birth-death processes and are appeared as discrete approximations of Pearson diffusions. The authors in these papers used the branching processes and the stochastic processes tools to discuss theoretically the fractional birth-death process.

    To this aim, the paper is organized as follows. Section 1 is devoted to the introduction. Section 2 is to derive the diffusion equation of the linear birth-death discrete exponential model. Section 3, is to derive the approximate discrete solutions of the classical (Markov) and non-classical (Non-Markov) linear birth-death process by the finite difference method. Section 4, is for driving the approximate solutions by the fourth order compact finite difference method. Finally, section 5, is to present and to discuss the numerical results.

    The birth death process is a stochastic process being defined as {X(t)=n,t0}, where its states X(0)=0,X(1)=1,X(2)=2, represent the number of customers or the number of (similar individuals) exist in the system at any time t, nN0. Now suppose two time instants t,t+τ with τ0 and two non negative integers i,j that represent the number of individuals [18]. Define the continuous time Markov chain's transition probability from the state X(t) with i number of individuals to its neighbour X(t+τ) with j number of individuals as

    P(t+τ)=P{X(t+τ)=j|X(t)=i,X(tτ)=i1,X(t2τ)=i2,,X(1)=in1,X(0)=in}=P{X(t+τ)=j|X(t)=i}, (2.1)

    or in other words, the process in the sate X(t+τ), depends only in the previous state X(t), and not on all the previous states, i.e., the the process has no memory. The Bays formula for the continuous time Markov chain

    P(t+τ)=k=0=P(X(t+τ|X(t)=k)P(X(t)=k).

    The Kolmogorov's forward equation of the discrete Markov chain reads

    Pij(t+τ)=k=0Pik(τ)Pkj(t).

    Subtract Pij from both sides, where for small τ, one can set Pij(t)=(1Pii(τ))Pij(t). So far, one gets

    Pij(t+τ)Pij(t)=kiPik(τ)Pkj(t)(1Pii(τ))Pij(t),

    where Pii0,i0, i.e., there is no absorbing states and jPij=1. If Pii(τ) is the probability that the process is in state i and will stay in i at the time τ, the 1Pii is the probability that the process is no longer in state i. Now divide both sides by τ and take the limit as τ0, to get

    Pij(t)t=kiCiPkj(t)DiPij(t), (2.2)

    where Ci=limτ0Pikτ, and Di=limτ01Piiτ are constants. For the birth-death process with birth rate λi and death rate μi, see [18], and for j=0, i.e. the system is empty, one has

    Pij(t)t=μ1Pi1(t)λ0Pi0(t). (2.3)

    This equation represents also the exponential queueing model M/M/1 in which there is only one customer in the system and is being served and no one joins the queue. The only restriction for the the queueing system is that λμ<1, to ensure that all the customers will be served. For j1, one has

    Pij(t)t=λj1Pij1(t)(λj+μj)Pij(t)+μj+1Pij+1(t), (2.4)

    λj,(1(λj+μj)),μj are the possible transition probabilities from the state Xj at the time instant tn to the sates Xj+1,Xj,Xj1, respectively, at the time instant tn+1, where Xj=jh. This equation represents the M/M/1 queue in which customers arrive according to Poisson process with arrival rate λj and the customer is served with rate μj and the time of serving is an exponential random variable.

    This equation represents also the first order time derivative of the transition probability Pij at any time instant tn, n0. For simplicity write Pij=Pj, i, and the same for the birth and death rates. The solution of Eq (2.4) represents the probability of finding j individuals at the system at any time t. Now suppose the number of customers in the system, the number of individuals exists at the colony, or the queueing system, are very large. or in other words j, and for mathematical convenience replace j by x. Then one can write λj1Pj1=λ(xh)P(xh), with h0, (λj+μj)Pj=(λ(x)+μ(x))P(x), and μj+1Pj+1=μ(x+h)P(x+h), where h is the space instant and h0. Now, Eq (2.4), could be rewritten as

    P(x,t)t=λ(xh)P(xh)+(λ(x)+μ(x))P(x)+μ(x+h)P(x+h), (2.5)

    and now the Taylor's expansion can be used to expand the terms λ(xh)P(xh) and μ(x+h)P(x+h), to get

    P(x,t)t=h222x2(λ(x)p(x)+μ(x)p(x))hx(λ(x)p(x)μ(x)p(x))+O(h3). (2.6)

    The functions λ(x) and μ(x) could be any smooth convergent functions. For linear birth-death process, one has to choose λ(x)=λx and μ(x)=μx, and henceforth Eq (2.6) is rewritten as

    P(x,t)t(x,t)=h22(λ+μ)2x2(xp(x,t))h(λμ)x(xp(x)). (2.7)

    Let R be the number of x steps and put h=1/R, and define the coefficients

    γ=12R2(λ+μ),α=(λμ)R,RN, (2.8)

    then Eq (2.7), with Eq (2.8) is identical with Eq (1.2), and is called the linear birth-death process. The linear birth-death process is a stochastic exponential model with random birth rate, rate of arrivals, λ(0,1) and random death rate μ(0,1), rate of departure or rate of service. The right hand side of Eq (2.7) is a special the form of the Fokker-Planck operator Lfp, see [12]. So far I prefer to write the linear birth-death process as

    P(x,t)t(x,t)=LfpP(x,t). (2.9)

    The waiting time between any two successive arrivals (birth) and departures (death) are exponentially distributed as eλt and eμt, respectively. The values of λ and μ could be fixed random number at all the next generations and could be computed as exponential random variables at each generation. The expected population size Eq (1.3) of Eq (2.7) is obtained as

    M(t)=0xu(x,t)dx=Neexp(t(λμ)R). (2.10)

    As λ>μ, the population increases and as λ<μ, the population decreases. In the next section, I am going to derive the discrete approximate solution of Eq (1.2), with its α and γ are calculated by Eq (2.8), by the explicit finite difference method (fdm).

    I am beginning the discussion of the approximate solution by the common rules of the explicit fdm as the basic of all the numerical methods. Define the nth-time step as

    tn=nτ,τ>0,nN0. (3.1)

    Introduce the clump y(n) as

    y(n)={y(n)1,y(n)2,,y(n)R2,y(n)R1}T, (3.2)

    where y(n)=y(tn) represents the discrete probability column vector to find m individual at the generation tn or at the time instant tn. To solve the partial differential Eq (1.2) and its equivalent Eq (2.7), the initial value y(0) has to satisfy R1j=1y(0)j=1, nN0. The proper choice is u(x,0)=δ(x), hence fourth

    y(0)={0,1,,0}T. (3.3)

    The discrete scheme of Eq (2.7), reads

    yn+1jynjτ=γh2[h(j+1)ynj+12hynj+h(j1)ynj1]α2h[(j+1)hynj+1(j1)hynj1]+O(h2+τ), (3.4)

    where n0. Define the scaling relation η=τh2, and solve for y(n+1)j, to get

    y(n+1)j=η(j1)(γR+α2R2)y(n)j1+(12jηγR)y(n)j+η(j+1)(γRα2R2)y(n)j+1, (3.5)

    where n0 and y(n+1)j represents the discrete probability density function of finding the system at the time instant tn+1 with m individuals. Summing the coefficients of the y(n)j1,y(n)j,y(n)j+1, one can easily find R1j=1y(n+1)j=1. The difference scheme (3.5) is stable and convergent if the scaling relation η satisfies the following condition

    0<ηR2jγ,1jR1, (3.6)

    and for the suitable choice as j=R2, one gets η1γ. The difference scheme (3.5), could be written in a matrix form as

    y(n+1)=PT.y(n),n0, (3.7)

    where the matrix P=Pij is R1×R1 and is defined as

    Pij={P(1)ij=η(j1)(γR+α2R2),i=j1,j=1,,R1P(2)ij=(12jηγR),i=j,j=1,,R1P(3)ij=η(j+1)(γRα2R2),i=j+1,j=1,,R1. (3.8)

    For proving the stability of this approximate solution, define the two column vectors Λ and 0, with length R1 as

    Λ={1,1,,1}T,0={0,0,,0}T.

    The matrix P is stable if it satisfies the two equal conditions

    ||PT||=max{||PT.ΛΛ||,||Λ0||} (3.9)

    or

    ||PT||=max1iR1R1j=1Pij. (3.10)

    Since P is a stochastic matrix, and PT.Λ=Λ, i.e., the sum over all its rows is 1. The matrix P satisfies the both stability conditions. The greatest eigenvalue of P is 1, then its spectral radius being defined as

    ρ(PT)=max1iRζi, (3.11)

    where {ζi} is the set of the eigenvalues of PT. Then for this case ρ(PT)||PT||=1, see [19] for more details about the stability of the explicit difference methods of the diffusion convection equations. Now for the purpose of computation, it is better to take the transpose of Eq (3.7) and rewrite it as

    z(n+1)=z(n).(I+η.H1),n0, (3.12)

    where z(n)=(y(n))T, I is the unit matrix. H1T is the matrix that satisfies H1T.Λ=0, i.e., the sum over all its rows is zero, and being defined as

    H1ij={H1(1)ij=η(j1)(γR+α2R2),i=j1,j=1,,R1H1(2)ij=2jηγR,i=j,j=1,,R1H1(3)ij=η(j+1)(γRα2R2),i=j+1,j=1,,R1. (3.13)

    The transition probabilities at Eq (3.5), constitute a Markov chain. Therefore, the waiting time between every two random events, arrivals of a new individual, is et, i.e., is exponentially distributed. That means this stochastic process at the time instant tn+1, depends only on the time instant tn, and neither nor all its previous history. In Reality, this is not correct and the history of the process has to be considered. In other words the number of individuals at the time instants tn1, tn2, ,t0, should be known.

    Now, to find the approximate solution of the time-fractional linear growth defined in Eq (1.6). The Caputo time fractional operator of order β is defined for a smooth function f(t) as

    CDβ0tf(t)={1Γ(nβ){t0f(n)(τ)Kβ(tτ)dτ}forn1<β<n,dndtnf(t)forβ=n, (3.14)

    where

    Kβ(tτ)=(tτ)β+1nΓ(nβ).

    The kernel Kβ(tτ) represents the memory function, and it reflects the memory effects of many physical, biological and etc. processes, see [22] and [23].

    Before going on our descretization of the Caputo fractional operator, I give a quick review about the advantages of using this operator on modelling the read–world problems. to do so, recall the definition the Riemann-Liouville fractional integral operator, denoted by Jβ, as

    Jβf(t)=1Γ(β)t0f(τ)(tτ)(1β)dτ,t>0,β>0. (3.15)

    For completeness, one sets J0f(t)=f(t). This means J0 is an identity operator. The Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative operator, for a sufficiently smooth function f(t) given in an interval [0,), is defined as (see for example:[25] and [24])

    (Dβf)(t):={1Γ(mβ)dmdtmt0f(τ)(tτ)β+1mdτ,m1<β<m,dmdtmf(t),m=β, (3.16)

    and

    Dβf(t)=D1J1βf(t).

    From the definitions (3.15) and (3.16), we can define the Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative Dβ as the left inverse of Jβ, β0. Therefore some authors prefer to write the Riemann-Liouville fractional integral operator Jβ as Dβ (e.g. [25,26,27]). For completeness, we have D0=I. One can deduce from the two definitions (3.14) and (3.16) that both the operators are non local but both have different kernels. The definition of Caputo is restrictive than Eq (3.16) because it requires that f(m)(t) exists. therefore, Caputo is more convenience for the mathematical manipulations. For completeness, we have D0=I.

    The Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative of the power function tμ, gives

    Dβtμ=Γ(μ+1)Γ(μ+1β)tμβ,β0.

    This means the Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative of a non-zero constant is different from zero. In fact

    Dβ1=Dβt0=Γ(1)Γ(1β)tβ,0<β<1.

    This is the main disadvantage of this operator. But CDβ0tf(t)=I as β=0. The Caputo operator with the Riemann-Liouville satisfies the relation

    CDβ0tf(t)=JmβDmf(t),m1<βm,

    Caputo can also be defined through its image in the Laplace transform domain, which is

    L{Dβf(t);s}=sβ˜f(s)sβ1f(0)ˊf(0)sβ2f(m1)(0)sβm,s>0.

    The Caputo fractional derivative of order, in the special case 0<β1 satisfies also

    CDβ0tf(t)=J1βDf(t)=Dβ(f(t)f(0+)), (3.17)

    and

    Dβ(f(t)f(0))=DJ1β(f(t)f(0))=Dβf(t)f(0)Γ(1β)tβ, (3.18)

    we can deduce that

    CDβ0tf(t)=Dβ(f(t)f(0)),0<β1, (3.19)

    This is the second difference between the Caputo and the Riemann Liouville derivatis. In other words, the Caputo depends on the initial condition of the function f(t). Recently Diethelm [29] stated in his book "The Main Disadvantage of the Riemann-Liouville Fractional Derivative is that it Fails to Model the Real World Phenomena of Fractional Differential Equation.".

    For discretizing the Caputo time-fractional derivative, I utilize the Grünwald- Letnikov scheme being reads

    CDβ0ty(n+1)j=n+1k=0(1)k(βk)y(n+1k)jy(0)jτβ,0<β1. (3.20)

    where

    CD0t1y(n+1)j=1τ(y(n+1)jy(n)j).

    To find the average number of individuals of this memory-dependent process M(t) defined in Eq (1.3), it is important to write Eq (1.6) in terms of the Fokker-Planck operator Lfp and the Riemann-Liouville fractional derivative operator D0tβ, as

    CDβ0tu(x,t)=D0tβ[u(x,t)u(x,0)]=Lfpu(x,t), (3.21)

    See reference [24]. This equation can also be written as

    u(x,t)u(x,0)=D0tβ(Lfpu(x,t)), (3.22)

    where D0tβ=Jβ, is the Riemann-Liouville fractional. Now multiply both sides of Eq (3.22) by x and integrate over x[0,), with regarding the initial condition u(x,0)=δ(x), and by using the natural properties of u(x,t) as probability density function, namely u(x,t)0, xux0 and x2ux20 as x, to get

    CDβ0tM(t)=αM(t). (3.23)

    This equation has the solution

    M(t)=Eβ(αtβ), (3.24)

    which is a special form of the so called Mittag-Leffler function. In the special case as β=1, it is identical to the exponential function eαt, for its simulation see reference [12]. That means the special case as β gives the same exponential average of individuals defined in Eq (2.10) but as 0<β<1, the average M(t) exhibits proportionally as the power function αt(β+1). Abdel-Rehim [38] has recently simulated the asymptotic behaviour of the Mittag-Leffler function and compared the results with the exponential function et and Hypergeometric1F1[1+n,2+n,t] function, for different values of t, β and n. Now the discrete scheme of the time-fractional population growth Eq (1.6) reads

    y(n+1)jβy(n)jn+1k=2(1)k(βk)y(n+1k)jn+1k=0(1)k(βk)y(0)j=γτβh2[h(j+1)ynj+12hynj+h(j1)ynj1]ατβ2h[(j+1)hynj+1(j1)hynj1], (3.25)

    where its error is of order O(h2+τβ). For convenience, recall the following coefficients

    bn=n+1k=0(1)k(βk),n=0,1,2,
    ck=(1)k+1(βk),k=1,2,,

    which are introduced by Gorenflo et al. [28]. These coefficients satisfy that b0=c1=β, all ck0, bn0, k=1ck=1, and finally satisfy the relation

    bn+nk=1ck=1. (3.26)

    Assuming the new scaling relation as η=τβh2, rearranging the terms of Eq (3.25) and solving for y(n+1)j, to get

    y(n+1)j=n+1k=0bny(0)j+n+1k=2cky(n+1k)j+(β2jηγR)y(n)j+η(j1)(γR+α2R2)y(n)j1+η(j+1)(γRα2R2)y(n)j+1, (3.27)

    where n1. For computing y(n+1)j, the values of y(n)j, y(n1)j, y(n2)j, ,y(0)j, should be known. That means the diffusion process for n1, depends on all the history, the process has a memory. That what is called the Non-Markov process. The difference scheme (3.27), is convergent if the coefficient of y(n)j, is positive and that requires that the scaling relation of this non-classical case should satisfy

    0<ηβR2jγ, (3.28)

    and again by choosing j=R/2, one gets a suitable condition for the scaling relation η. The difference scheme (3.27) could be written in the matrix form as

    z(n+1)=n+1k=0bnz(0)j+n+1k=2ckz(n+1k)j+z(n).(βI+η.H1),n1. (3.29)

    Again the difference scheme (3.27) is stable as the matrix (βI+η.H1)T.Λ=βΛ, then ||(βI+η.H1)T||=β with 0<β<1. That satisfies the stability condition (3.9), and hence forth the second condition (3.10) is satisfied. The maximum eigenvalue of the matrix (βI+η.H1)T is β<1, therefore the spectral radius being defined as of this difference scheme is ρ(βI+η.H1)T<1. Then this difference scheme is stable and the scaling relation condition (3.28) ensures its convergence. Abdel-Rehim [20] proved that the waiting time between every two arrivals (events) on the time-fractional diffusion processes is the Mittag-Leffler function, see also [21] and the references therein for more details about the job of the Mittag-Leffler function on the continuous time random walk.

    For n=0, this is the first state after the initial state. By returning back to Eq (3.25), we find that y(1) represents the probability of finding the system at the state X(1). Therefore, the approximate solution as n=0, is computed according to Eq (3.12) as

    z(1)=z(0).(I+η.H1),n0, (3.30)

    and in this case, the transitions could be described as a Markov chain. In the following section, I use the fourth order compact finite difference method (focfd) to derive the stable difference scheme of studied models to be compared with the results obtained by fdm.

    The finite difference method used in the above section has many advantages such as: it is computationally efficiency, requires simple code structures and it maintain the mass conservation. Its only disadvantage is that it is irregular geometric matching. To interpret this sentence suppose that f(x) is a smooth continuous function and its derivative fx=df(x)dx exists. define the truncation error by O. Define also xi=ih, xi+1=x+h, and xi1=xh. Then one deduce

    fx(xi)=f(xi)f(xi1)h,O(h)

    and

    fx(xi)=f(xi+1)f(xi1)2h,O(h2).

    In general

    fx(xi)nj=nαjf(xi+j),O(hn).

    That means to obtain a truncation error of order O(hn), one needs to use 2n+1 values of f(x) to approximate fx(xi). Therefore, the fdm is inconvenience for solving the partial differential equations with variable coefficients near the boundaries.

    The focfd did overcome this trouble by adding more nodes with few grid points smaller mesh sizes, in order to obtain a higher order of truncation error.

    The focfd has been proved and implemented by many authors. It has been proved that the obtained approximate solution is approximately consistent with the exact solution, especially of the advection convection equations, than by using the common fdm rules.

    Turkel and Singer [30], introduced limited grid sizes to make the high-order compact finite difference schemes produce more accurate solutions. Later [33], the focfd is improved by eliminating the convection term to make it more easier to implement the central difference schemes to solve convection-diffusion equations efficiently. For more details about the advantages and the disadvantages of the compact finite difference methods, see [31,32,34,35,36]. One can deduce from these references that the main advantage of the focfd is the high accuracy.

    It is known that the first δxy(n)j and the second δ2xy(n)j classical spatial discrete central finite difference operators are defined as

    δxy(n)j=y(n)j+1y(n)j12h,δ2xy(n)j=y(n)j+12y(n)j+y(n)j1h2, (4.1)

    where the clump y(n), for this method, is defined as

    y(n)={y(n)2,y(n)2,,y(n)R2,y(n)R2}T. (4.2)

    To implement the focfd one has to use 1st derivative operator that is defined as, see references [33,34],

    (yx)(n)j=δxy(n)j2h(1+16δ2x), (4.3)

    and the 2nd derivative operator is defined as

    (2yx2)(n)j=δ2xy(n)jh2(1+112δ2x). (4.4)

    First apply the focfd method on the classical case (2.7), to get

    (1+16δ2x)(1+112δ2x)(yn+1jynj)=γτh2(1+16δ2x)(δ2xxjynj)ατ2h(1+112δ2x)(δxxjynj)+O(h2+τ), (4.5)

    and use the same scaling relation of the classical Markov case η=τh2, one gets after some manipulations

    172y(n+1)j+2+1472y(n+1)j+1+4272y(n+1)j+1472y(n+1)j1+172y(n+1)j2172y(n)j+21472y(n)j+14272y(n)j1472y(n)j1172y(n)j2=η(j2)R(γ+α24R)yj2+η(j1)R(2γ+10α24R)y(n)j16γηjRy(n)j+η(j+1)R(2γ10α24R)y(n)j+1+η(j+2)R(γα24R)y(n)j+2,n0. (4.6)

    As we see from this difference scheme y(n+1)j is the probability of finding m individuals at the time instant tn+1, i.e., at the states while it may be at one of the states Xj2(tn),Xj1(tn),Xj(tn),Xj+1(tn),Xj+2(tn). This difference scheme could be written in the matrix form as

    KT.y(n+1)KT.y(n)=ηHT.y(n), (4.7)

    where the matrix K is defined as

    Kij={K(1)ij=172,i=j2,j=2,,R2K(2)ij=1472,i=j1,j=2,,R2K(3)ij=4272,i=j,j=2,,R2K(4)ij=1472,i=j+1,j=2,,R2K(5)ij=172,i=j+2,j=2,,R2. (4.8)

    It is clear that the sum over all its elements is one. The matrix H has the form

    Hij={H(1)ij=(j2)R(γ+α24R),i=j2,j=2,,R2H(2)ij=(j1)R(2γ+10α24R),i=j1,j=2,,R2H(3)ij=6γjR,i=j,j=2,,R2H(4)ij=(j+1)R(2γ10α24R),i=j1,j=2,,R2H(5)ij=(j+2)R(γα24R),i=j1,j=2,,R2, (4.9)

    where it is easy to prove that the sum over all its elements is zero. Now take the transpose of each sides of Eq (4.7) and multiply each sides by K1, to get

    z(n+1)=z(n).(I+ηH.K1),n0, (4.10)

    where zn is the transpose of the clump defined in Eq (4.2). Again the obtained approximate solution is stable as (I+η.H.K1)T.Λ=Λ, and the two stability conditions (3.9) and (3.10) are satisfied. Again the scheme is also convergent the scaling relation η satisfies the following condition.

    42726γηjR0.

    Now, I seek to find the approximate solution of the time fractional linear birth-death (linear growth) large population Eq (1.6). Therefore apply the 1nd and the 2nd derivative operators, to get

    (1+16δ2x)(1+112δ2x)(y(n+1)jβy(n)jn+1k=2(1)k(βk)y(n+1k)jn+1k=0(1)k(βk)y(0)j)=γτβh2(1+16δ2x)(δ2xxjynj)ατβ2h(1+112δ2x)(δxxjynj)+O(h2+τβ). (4.11)

    Regarding the initial condition u(x,0)=δ(x) and its discrete clump (3.3), one gets after some mathematical manipulations.

    KT.y(n+1)=n+1k=0bny(0)j+n+1k=2ckKT.y(n+1k)j+βKT.y(n)+ηHT.y(n),n1, (4.12)

    where the matrices K and H are defined in Eqs (4.8) and (4.9) respectively. Again this discrete difference scheme is convergent if the scaling relation η=τβh2, satisfies the positivity condition

    42726βγηjR0.

    The stability of the matrix (βI+ηH.K1) has been previously proven. The case as n=0, is calculated similar to the classical Markov case as

    z(1)=z(0).(I+ηH.K1),. (4.13)

    In the next section, the time evolutions of the obtained approximate solutions will be simulated with different values of the fractional order β and t, to show how the memory affects on the randomly number of individuals existing on the birth-death queueing system (the number of asexually like produced individuals at any colony).

    Feller [5], assumed in his paper that γ=1, and α may has one the three values 0,1,1. Galton-Watson assumed that α and γ are proportional to the initial size of individuals Ne, see [37]. The authors at [37], fix the expected population size as M(t)=M(0)=M0Ne, from Eq (1.3) then α=1tlnNeM0, for λ<μ and substitute on the analytic solution derived by Feller. The authors fix also σ2=γ to be one or two.

    In this paper, I give numerical results for the cases corresponding to λ>μ and λ<μ. To grantee the stability of the difference schemes, the scaling relation η, should satisfy the stability relations (3.6) and (3.28). Further more for better approximate solutions, one has to choose 0<η<<R2jγ for the classical case and 0<η<<βR2jγ for the non-classical case.

    The first group of Figures 18 are devoted for the case λ<μ. I choose λ=0.1 and μ=0.3, i.e., α=0.02 and γ=0.002, and λμ=13.

    Figure 1.  The time evolution of the approximate solutions of the classical case β=1, left, and for the non classical case β=0.75, right.
    Figure 2.  The time evolution of the approximate solutions of the classical case β=1, left, and for the non classical case β=0.75, right.
    Figure 3.  The comparison of time evolution of the approximate solutions of the classical and the non classical case for different values β at fixed values of t.
    Figure 4.  The time evolution of the approximate solutions of the classical case β=1 by the fourth order compact FDM.
    Figure 5.  The time evolution of the approximate solutions of the classical case β=1, left, and for the non classical case β=0.75, right.
    Figure 6.  The comparison of time evolution of the approximate solutions of the classical and the non classical case for different values β at fixed values of t.
    Figure 7.  The comparison of time evolution of the approximate solutions of the classical, left, and non classical case as β=0.75, right.
    Figure 8.  The comparison of time evolution of the approximate solutions of the classical, left, and non classical case as β=0.75, right.

    First the numerical results by the finite difference method: Figure 1, represents the time evolution of the approximate solutions of the classical and time-fractional linear birth death equations, for small values of t.

    Figure 2 represents the time evolution of their y(n), for different values of t. The figure shows that the diffusion of the time-fractional growth is slower than the classical one.

    It is worth to say that all the approximate solutions behave likely for small values of t. The difference on the yaxis becomes larger as t increases.

    The comparison of the approximate solutions by the finite difference method are given in Figure 3. The figure shows also that the classical case diffuses faster than the fractional case.

    Second the numerical results by the fourth order compact finite difference:

    Figure 4 shows the time evolution of the classical case. The figure shows the diffusion is much faster as β=1 than by using the fdm for both small and large values of t.

    Figure 5 represents the time evolution of the classical and non-classical for different values of β and t. The fractional growth is more slower than the classical as it diffuses near its initial condition but the classical diffuses far away than its initial value.

    Figure 6 represents the comparison of the approximate solutions of the classical and non classical. The figure shows that the power growth is slower than the exponential growth.

    Now, I compare the results obtained by the finite difference and the fourth order compact finite difference at Figures 7 and 8. The figures show that the difference between the two methods is very big at small values of t as the focfd diffuses faster. But at t increases the difference becomes smaller.

    The focfd has to imitate the exact solution. it has to be more accurate than the fdm. One can that the behavior is different near x=0 and x=1.

    The second group of Figures 912 are for the case λ>μ. I choose λ=0.3 and μ=0.1, i.e., α=0.02 and γ=0.002, and λμ=3.

    Figure 9.  The time evolution of the approximate solutions of the classical case β=1, left, and for the non classical case β=0.75, right.
    Figure 10.  The comparison of time evolution of the approximate solutions of the classical and the non classical case for different values β at fixed values of t.
    Figure 11.  The time evolution of the approximate solutions of the classical case β=1, left, and for the non classical case β=0.75, right.
    Figure 12.  The comparison of time evolution of the approximate solutions of the classical and the non classical case for different values β at fixed values of t.

    I begin this group the approximate solutions by the finite difference method. Figure 9 represents the approximate solutions of the discussed cases for different values of β and t. It is obvious that the growth diffuses faster than the first group of figures, namely as λ<μ.

    Figure 10 shows the comparison of the solutions for fixed time and different values of β. I used here the fourth order compact finite difference method. One can see that power growth is faster than exponential growth.

    Figure 11 represents the time evolution of the discrete schemes for different values of t by using the fdm. The time fractional is also slower than the classical.

    The comparison of the results obtained by the fourth order compact finite difference for different values of β is shown at Figure 12.

    Now, I compare the numerical results of the finite difference and the fourth order compact finite difference methods at the Figures 13 and 14. The results show that the effect of the drift on the diffusion process is obvious as λ>μ. Also the results show that the classical case always diffuses faster than the classical case.

    Figure 13.  The comparison of time evolution of the approximate solutions of the classical and the non classical case as β=1 left, β=0.75 right at fixed t=3.
    Figure 14.  The comparison of time evolution of the approximate solutions of the classical and the non classical case as β=1 left, β=0.65 right at fixed t=3.

    The comparison between the results of fd and focfd shows that the difference is bigger at the earlier time and the difference becomes smaller on the long run. The difference is also bigger in the classical case than the non-classical case.

    In this paper, I derived the classical birth-death equation. This equation represents the exponential growth of large similar population. Then I extent it to the time fractional birth-death equation as a non-classical partial differential equation. It formulates the power growth of the large similar population. I fix the number of individuals and choose suitable values for the rate of birth and the rate of death to be consistent with the international rates of growth and death. I used the finite difference method and the fourth order compact finite difference method to obtain the approximate solutions of the studied equations. I give numerical results for the rate of birth is bigger than the rate of death and vice versa.

    In general the numerical results show that the time-fractional approximate solution diffuses slower than than the classical one. The power and the exponential growth are faster as λ>μ than as λ<μ. Another important note, is that the time-fractional birth-death process diffuses near its initial values more than the classical case which diffuses far away than it. Finally, The behaviours of the plot near the lateral points are different in both methods and this is consistent with main advantage of the focfd, which is it is more accurate more than the fd especially near the boundaries.

    The author declares there is no conflicts of interest.

    [1] Bajaj M, Vijh AM (1995) Trading Behavior and the Unbiasedness of the Market Reaction to Dividend Announcement. J Finance 50: 255-279. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1995.tb05173.x
    [2] Baker M, Stein J (2004) Market Liquidity as a Sentiment Indicator. J Financ Mark 7: 271-299. doi: 10.1016/j.finmar.2003.11.005
    [3] Bamber LS, Barron OE, Stober TL (1997) Trading Volume and Different Aspects of Disagreement Coincident with Earnings Announcements. The Account Rev 72: 575-597.
    [4] Bamber LS, Barron OE, Stober TL (1999) Differential Interpretations and Trading Volume. J Financ Quant Anal 34: 369-386. doi: 10.2307/2676264
    [5] Bamber LS, Barron OE, Stevens DE (2011) Trading Volume around Earnings Announcements and Other Financial Reports: Theory, Research Design, Empirical Evidence, and Directions for Future Research. Contemp Account Res 28: 431-471. doi: 10.1111/j.1911-3846.2010.01061.x
    [6] Barber BM, Odean T (2008) All That Glitters: The Effect of Attention and News on the Buying Behavior of Individual and Institutional Investors. Rev Financ Stud 21: 785–818. doi: 10.1093/rfs/hhm079
    [7] Barron OE, Harris DG, Stanford M (2005) Evidence That Investors Trade on Private Event-Period Information around Earnings Announcements. Account Rev 80: 403-421. doi: 10.2308/accr.2005.80.2.403
    [8] Basci E, Ozyildinm S, Aydogan K (1996) A Note on Price–Volume Dynamics in an Emerging Stock Market. J Banking Finance 20: 389–400. doi: 10.1016/0378-4266(95)00003-8
    [9] Beaver WH (1968) The Information Content of Annual Earnings Announcements. Empirical Research in Accounting: Selected Studies, Supplement to J Account Res 6: 67–92. doi: 10.2307/2490070
    [10] Beggs A, Graddy K (2009) Anchoring Effects: Evidence from Art Auctions. Am Econ Rev 99: 1027-1039. doi: 10.1257/aer.99.3.1027
    [11] Biswas A, Burton S (1993) Consumer Perceptions of Tensile Price Claims in Advertisements: An Assessment of Claim Types across Different Discount Levels. J Acad Mark Sci 21: 217–229. doi: 10.1177/0092070393213005
    [12] Blume ME, Mackinlay AC, Terker B (1989) Order Imbalances and Stock Movements on October 19 and 20, 1987. J Finance 44: 827–848. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1989.tb02626.x
    [13] Bowman NA, Bastedo MN (2011) Anchoring Effects in World University Rankings: Exploring Biases in Reputation Scores. Higher Educ 61: 431-444. doi: 10.1007/s10734-010-9339-1
    [14] Caginalpa G, Desantisa M (2011) Stock Price Dynamics: Nonlinear Trend, Volume, Volatility, Resistance and Money Supply. Quant Finance 11: 849-861. doi: 10.1080/14697680903220356
    [15] Campbell JY, Grossman SJ, Wang J (1993) Trading Volume and Serial Correlation in Stock Returns. Q J Econ 108: 905–939. doi: 10.2307/2118454
    [16] Campbell SD, Sharpe SA (2009) Anchoring Bias in Consensus Forecasts and its Effect on Market Prices. J Financ Quant Anal 44: 369-390. doi: 10.1017/S0022109009090127
    [17] Cen L, Hilary G, Wei KCJ (2013) The Role of Anchoring Bias in the Equity Market: Evidence from Analysts' Earnings Forecasts and Stock Returns. J Financ Quant Anal 48: 47-76. doi: 10.1017/S0022109012000609
    [18] Cervone D, Peake PK (1986) Anchoring, Efficacy, and Action: The Influence of Judgmental Heuristics on Self-Efficacy Judgment and Behavior. J Pers Soc Psychol 50: 492–501. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.50.3.492
    [19] Chapman GB, Johnson EJ (1994) The Limits of Anchoring. J Behav Decis Making, 7: 223–242. doi: 10.1002/bdm.3960070402
    [20] Chen G, Firth M, Rui OM (2001) The Dynamic Relation between Stock Returns, Trading Volume and Volatility. Financ Rev 36: 153-174. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6288.2001.tb00024.x
    [21] Chordia T, Huh S-W, Subrahmanyam A (2007) The Cross-Section of Expected Trading Activity. Rev Financ Stud 30: 709-740.
    [22] Crouch RL (1970) A Nonlinear Test of the Random-Walk Hypothesis. Am Econ Rev 60: 199-202.
    [23] De Long B, Shleifer A, Summers L, Waldmann R (1990) Positive Feedback Investment Strategies and Destabilizing Rational Speculation. J Finance 45: 379-386. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1990.tb03695.x
    [24] Ehrbeck T, Waldman R (1996) Why are Professional Forecasters Biased? Agency Versus Behavioral Explanations. Q J Econ 111: 21-40.
    [25] English B (2008) When Knowledge Matters-Differential Effects of Available Knowledge in Standard and Basic Anchoring Tasks. Eur J Soc Psychol 38: 896-904. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.479
    [26] English B, Mussweiler T (2001) Sentencing under Uncertainty: Anchoring Effects in the Courtroom. J Appl Soc Psychol 31: 1535–1551. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb02687.x
    [27] Epps TW (1975) Security Price Changes and Transaction Volumes: Theory and Evidence. Am Econ Rev 65: 586–597.
    [28] Epps TW (1977) Security Price Changes and Transaction Volumes: Some Additional Evidence. J Financ Quant Anal 12: 141–146. doi: 10.2307/2330293
    [29] Epps TW, Epps ML (1976) The Stochastic Dependence of Security Price Changes and Transaction Volumes: Implications for the Mixture-of-Distributions Hypothesis. Econometrica 44: 305-321. doi: 10.2307/1912726
    [30] Fisher KL, Statman M (2000) Cognitive Biases in Market Forecasts. J Portf Manage 27: 72-81. doi: 10.3905/jpm.2000.319785
    [31] Galinsky AD, Mussweiler T (2001) First Offers as Anchors: The Role of Perspective-Taking and Negotiator Focus. J Pers Soc Psychol 81: 657–669. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.81.4.657
    [32] Gallant R, Rossi P, Tauchen G (1992) Stock Prices and Volume. Rev Financ Stud 5: 199-242. doi: 10.1093/rfs/5.2.199
    [33] Garfinkel JA, Sokobin J (2006) Volume, Opinion Divergence, and Returns: A Study of Post-Earnings Announcement Drift. J Account Res 44: 85-112. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-679X.2006.00193.x
    [34] Gervais S, Kaniel R, Mingelgrin DH (2001) The High Volume Return Premium. J Finance 56: 877–919. doi: 10.1111/0022-1082.00349
    [35] Glaser M, Weber M (2009) Which Past Returns Affect Trading Volume? J Financ Mark 12: 1-31. doi: 10.1016/j.finmar.2008.03.001
    [36] Griffin M, Nardari F, Stulz RM (2007) Do Investors Trade More When Stocks Have Performed Well? Evidence from 46 Countries. Rev Financ Stud 20: 905–951.
    [37] Gruen DK, Gizycki MC (1993) Explaining Forward Discount Bias: Is It Anchoring? Princeton University Woodrow Wilson School Discussion Paper in Economics 164.
    [38] Harris L (1983) The Joint Dislrihuiion of Speculative Prices and of Daily Trading Volume. Working Paper, University of Southern CA.
    [39] Harris M, Raviv A (1993) Differences of Opinion Make a Horse Race. Rev Financ Stud 6: 473-506. doi: 10.1093/rfs/5.3.473
    [40] Hirshleifer D, Subrahmanyam A, Titman S (1994) Security Analysis and Trading Patterns When Some Investors Receive Information before Others. J Finance 49: 1665-1698. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1994.tb04777.x
    [41] Hirshleifer D, Subrahmanyam A, Titman S (2006) Feedback and the Success of Irrational Investors. J Financ Econ 81: 311-338. doi: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2005.05.006
    [42] Holthausen RW, Verrecchia RE (1990) The Effect of Informedness and Consensus on Price and Volume Behavior. Account Rev 65: 191-208.
    [43] Hong H, Stein JC (1999) A Unified Theory of Underreaction, Momentum Trading, and Overreaction in Asset Markets. J Finance 54: 2143-2184. doi: 10.1111/0022-1082.00184
    [44] Hong H, Stein JC (2007) Disagreement and the Stock Market. J Econ Perspect 21: 109-128. doi: 10.1257/jep.21.2.109
    [45] Hong H, Yu J (2009) Gone Fishin': Seasonality in Trading Activity and Asset Prices. J Financ Mark 12: 672-702. doi: 10.1016/j.finmar.2009.06.001
    [46] Huddart S, Lang M, Yetman MH (2009) Volume and Price Patterns around a Stock's 52-Week Highs and Lows: Theory and Evidence. Manage Sci 55: 16-31. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1080.0920
    [47] Israeli D (2015) Trading Volume Reactions to Earnings Announcements and Future Stock Returns. Working Paper, Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya.
    [48] Jacowitz KE, Kahneman D (1995) Measures of Anchoring in Estimation Tasks. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 21: 1161–1166. doi: 10.1177/01461672952111004
    [49] Jain PC, Joh G-H (1986) The Dependence between Hourly Prices and Trading Volume. Working Paper, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.
    [50] Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (1982) Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, New York: Cambridge University Press.
    [51] Kandel E, Pearson N (1995) Differential Interpretation of Public Signals and Trade in Speculative Markets. J Polit Econ 103: 831-872. doi: 10.1086/262005
    [52] Karpoff JM (1986) A Theory of Trading Volume. J Finance, 41: 1069-1087. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1986.tb02531.x
    [53] Karpoff JM (1987) The Relation between Price Changes and Trading Volume: A Survey. J Financ Quant Anal 22: 109-126. doi: 10.2307/2330874
    [54] Khan SU, Rizwan F (2008) Trading Volume and Stock Returns: Evidence from Pakistan's Stock Market. Int Rev Bus Res Pap 4: 151-162.
    [55] Kim O, Verrecchia RE (1991) Market Reaction to Anticipated Announcements. J Financ Econ 30: 273-309. doi: 10.1016/0304-405X(91)90033-G
    [56] Kim O, Verrecchia RE (1994) Market Liquidity and Volume around Earnings Announcements. J Account Econ 17: 41–67. doi: 10.1016/0165-4101(94)90004-3
    [57] Kim O, Verrecchia RE (1997) Pre-Announcement and Event-Period Private Information. J Account Econ 24: 395-419. doi: 10.1016/S0165-4101(98)00013-5
    [58] Kliger D, Kudryavtsev A (2010) The Availability Heuristic and Investors' Reaction to Company-Specific Events. J Behav Finance 11: 50-65. doi: 10.1080/15427561003591116
    [59] Kudryavtsev A, Cohen G (2010a) Illusion of Relevance: Anchoring in Economic and Financial Knowledge. Int J Econ Res 1: 86-101.
    [60] Kudryavtsev A, Cohen G (2010b) Anchoring and Pre-Existing Knowledge in Economic and Financial Settings. Am J Soc Manage Sci 1: 164-180.
    [61] Lakonishok J, Vermaelen T (1986) Tax-Induced Trading around Ex-Dividend Days. J Financ Econ 16: 287-319. doi: 10.1016/0304-405X(86)90032-2
    [62] Lee SB, Rui OM (2002) The Dynamic Relationship between Stock Return and Trading Volume: Domestic and Cross-Country Evidence. J Banking Finance 26: 51-78.
    [63] Leung TC, Tsang KP (2013) Anchoring and Loss Aversion in the Housing Market: Implications on Price Dynamics, China Econ Rev 24: 42-54.
    [64] Llorente G, Michaely R, Saar G, Wang J (2002) Dynamic Volume-Return Relation of Individual Stocks. Rev Financ Stud 15: 1005-1047. doi: 10.1093/rfs/15.4.1005
    [65] Lo AW, Wang J (2006) Trading Volume: Implications of an Intertemporal Capiral Asset Pricing Model. J Finance 61: 2805–2840. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2006.01005.x
    [66] Mussweiler T (2001) The Durability of Anchoring Effects. Eur J Soc Psychol 31: 431–442. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.52
    [67] Mussweiler T, Strack F (1999a) Comparing is Believing: A Selective Accessibility Model of Judgmental Anchoring, In: Stroebe W, Hewstone M, European review of social psychology, Chichester: Wiley, 10: 135-167.
    [68] Mussweiler T, Strack F (1999b) Hypothesis-Consistent Testing and Semantic Priming in the Anchoring Paradigm: A Selective Accessibility Model. J Exp Soc Psychol 35: 136–164.
    [69] Mussweiler T, Strack F (2000) Numeric Judgment under Uncertainty: The Role of Knowledge in Anchoring. J Exp Soc Psychol 36: 495–518. doi: 10.1006/jesp.1999.1414
    [70] Ndjadingwe E, Radikoko I (2015) Investigating the Effects of Dividends Pay-out on Stock Prices and Traded Equity Volumes of BSE Listed Firms. Int J Innovation and Econ Dev 1: 24-37. doi: 10.18775/ijied.1849-7551-7020.2015.14.2002
    [71] Osborne MFM (1959) Brownian Motion in the Stock Market. Oper Res 1: 145-173.
    [72] Pathirawasam C (2011) The Relationship between Trading Volume and Stock Returns. J Competitiveness 3: 41-49.
    [73] Pisedtasalasai A, Gunasekarage A (2007) Causal and Dynamic Relationships among Stock Returns, Return Volatility and Trading Volume: Evidence from Emerging Markets in South-East Asia. Asia-Pac Financ Mark 14: 277-297. doi: 10.1007/s10690-008-9063-3
    [74] Plous S (1989) Thinking the Unthinkable: The Effects of Anchoring on Likelihood Estimates of Nuclear War. J Appl Soc Psychol 19: 67–91. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1989.tb01221.x
    [75] Remorov R (2014) Stock Price and Trading Volume during Market Crashes. Int J Mark Stud 6: 21-30.
    [76] Rutledge DJS (1984) Trading Volume and Price Variability: New Evidence on the Price Effects of Speculation, In: Peck AE, Selected Writings on Futures Markets: Research Directions in Commodity Markets, Chicago: Chicago Board of Trade, 237-251.
    [77] Saatccioglu K, Starks LT (1998) The Stock Price–Volume Relationship in Emerging Stock Markets: The Case of Latin America. Int J Forecast 14: 215–225. doi: 10.1016/S0169-2070(98)00028-4
    [78] Safvenblad P (2000) Trading Volume and Autocorrelation: Empirical Evidence from the Stockholm Stock Exchange. J Banking Finance 24: 1275–1287. doi: 10.1016/S0378-4266(99)00071-0
    [79] Schwert W (1989) Why Does Stock Market Volatility Change Over Time? J Finance 44: 1115-1155. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1989.tb02647.x
    [80] Simonson I, Drolet A (2004) Anchoring Effects on Consumers' Willingness-to-Pay and Willingness-to-Accept. J Consum Res 31: 681-690. doi: 10.1086/425103
    [81] Statman M, Thorley S, Vorkink K (2006) Investor Overconfidence and Trading Volume. Rev Financ Stud 19: 1531-1565. doi: 10.1093/rfs/hhj032
    [82] Strack F, Mussweiler T (1997) Explaining the Enigmatic Anchoring Effect: Mechanisms of Selective Accessibility. J Pers Soc Psychol 73: 437–446. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.73.3.437
    [83] Tran QT, Mai YD (2015) Stock Market Reaction to Dividend Announcements from a Special Institutional Environment of Vietnamese Stock Market. Int J Econ Finance 7: 50-58.
    [84] Tversky A, Kahneman D (1973) Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability. Cognit Psychol 4: 207–232. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(73)90012-1
    [85] Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Sci 185: 1124-1131. doi: 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
    [86] Varian HR (1989) Differences of Opinion in Financial Markets. In Financial Risk: Theory, Evidence and Implications: Proceedings of the 11th Annual Economic Policy Conference of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, 3–37.
    [87] Verrecchia RE (1981) On the Relationship between Volume Reaction and Consensus of Investors: Implications for Interpreting Tests of Information Content. J Account Res 19: 271-283. doi: 10.2307/2490975
    [88] Westerfield R (1977) The Distribution of Common Stock Price Changes: An Application of Transactions Time and Subordinated Stochastic Models. J Financ Quant Anal 12: 743-765. doi: 10.2307/2330254
    [89] Wilson TD, Houston C, Etling KM, Brekke N (1996) A New Look at Anchoring Effects: Basic Anchoring and its Antecedents. J Exp Psychol: Gen 125: 387–402. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.125.4.387
    [90] Wood RA, McInish TH, Ord KJ (1985) An Investigation of Transactions Data for NYSE Stocks. J Finance 40: 723-739. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.1985.tb04996.x
    [91] Xu P, Rui OM, Kim S (2002) Risk Shift Following Dividend Change Announcement: The Role of Trading. Rev Quant Finance Account 19: 45-63. doi: 10.1023/A:1015778208868
    [92] Ying CC (1966) Stock Market Prices and Volumes of Sales. Econometrica 34: 676-686. doi: 10.2307/1909776
    [93] Ziebart DA (1990) The Association between Consensus of Beliefs and Trading Activity Surrounding Earnings Announcements. Account Rev 65: 477-488.
    [94] Zielonka P (2004) Technical Analysis as the Representation of Typical Cognitive Biases. Int Rev Financ Anal 13: 217-225.
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2017 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(6172) PDF downloads(1175) Cited by(3)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog