共 60 条
Disclosure Sentiment: Machine Learning vs. Dictionary Methods
被引:56
作者:
Frankel, Richard
[1
]
Jennings, Jared
[1
]
Lee, Joshua
[2
]
机构:
[1] Washington Univ, Olin Business Sch, St Louis, MO 63130 USA
[2] Brigham Young Univ, Marriott Sch Business, Provo, UT 84602 USA
关键词:
textual analysis;
machine learning;
disclosure;
conference calls;
INFORMATION-CONTENT;
TEXTUAL ANALYSIS;
CONFERENCE CALLS;
EARNINGS;
ANALYSTS;
PRESS;
RISK;
READABILITY;
VOLATILITY;
MANAGEMENT;
D O I:
10.1287/mnsc.2021.4156
中图分类号:
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号:
12 ;
1201 ;
1202 ;
120202 ;
摘要:
We compare the ability of dictionary-based and machine-learning methods to capture disclosure sentiment at 10-K filing and conference-call dates. Like Loughran and McDonald [Loughran T, McDonald B (2011) When is a liability not a liability? Textual analysis, dictionaries, and 10-Ks. J. Finance 66(1):35-65.], we use returns to assess sentiment. We find that measures based on machine learning offer a significant improvement in explanatory power over dictionary-based measures. Specifically, machine-learning measures explain returns at 10-K filing dates, whereas measures based on the Loughran and McDonald dictionary only explain returns at 10-K filing dates during the time period of their study. Moreover, at conference-call dates, machine-learning methods offer an improvement over the Loughran and McDonald dictionary method of a greater magnitude than the improvement of the Loughran and McDonald dictionary over the Harvard Psychosociological Dictionary. We further find that the random-forest-regression-tree method better captures disclosure sentiment than alternative algorithms, simplifying the application of the machine-learning approach. Overall, our results suggest that machine-learning methods offer an easily implementable, more powerful, and reliable measure of disclosure sentiment than dictionary-based methods.
引用
收藏
页码:5514 / 5532
页数:19
相关论文