Testing for expense preference behavior: mutual versus stock savings and loans
AbstractThis article investigates expense preference behavior in the savings and loan industry. Previous studies used an intercept test and, in general, concluded that managers of mutual S&Ls exhibit expense preference behavior. I derive the necessary and sufficient conditions on cost functions for the intercept test to be valid. These restrictions are rejected for the savings and loan industry. Stock and mutual S&Ls have different cost structures, and both have non-Cobb-Douglas production technologies. I derive a new, more general test for expense preference behavior that does not require the restrictive assumptions of the intercept test. The results of this test do not support earlier conclusions of managerial expense preferences.
Download InfoTo our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia in its series Working Papers with number 89-27.
Date of creation: 1989
Date of revision:
Other versions of this item:
- Loretta J. Mester, 1989. "Testing for Expense Preference Behavior: Mutual versus Stock Savings and Loans," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 20(4), pages 483-498, Winter.
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Beth Paul).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.