IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/jfcpps/jfc-04-2013-0030.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“Gossip boys”: insider trading and regulatory ambiguity

Author

Listed:
  • Laura L. Hansen

Abstract

Purpose - – The purpose of this viewpoint, case study analysis paper is to assist in understanding how history repeats itself in the case of insider trading, even with regulatory intervention. Design/methodology/approach - – Qualitative methodology approach, using interviews of some of the watchdogs of Wall Street (SEC, US Attorney's Office) during the insider trading scandals of the 1980s. Key themes including ambiguity of money, regulation, and the networks of financial institution professionals are discussed. Findings - – Findings suggest that regulation is difficult if nearly impossible, in the face of limited resources and regulatory ambiguity. Practical implications - – This paper suggests a network approach to regulators, corporate decision makers, and academics in order to understand the structure of insider trading conspiracies. Originality/value - – Continues the tradition of qualitative research in a niche of white-collar crime that is more often approached with strict statistic analysis. Value is that the data are allowed to “speak for themselves” and patterns of structure are allowed to emerge without prior biases of hypotheses.

Suggested Citation

  • Laura L. Hansen, 2014. "“Gossip boys”: insider trading and regulatory ambiguity," Journal of Financial Crime, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 21(1), pages 29-43, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eme:jfcpps:jfc-04-2013-0030
    DOI: 10.1108/JFC-04-2013-0030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JFC-04-2013-0030/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JFC-04-2013-0030/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/JFC-04-2013-0030?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:jfcpps:jfc-04-2013-0030. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.