Knightian uncertainty and stock-price movements: Why the REH present-value model failed empirically
Macroeconomic models that are based on either the rational expectations hypothesis (REH) or behavioral considerations share a core premise: All future market outcomes can be characterized ex ante with a single overarching probability distribution. This paper assesses the empirical relevance of this premise using a novel data set. The authors find that Knightian uncertainty, which cannot be reduced to a probability distribution, underpins outcomes in the stock market. This finding reveals the full implications of Robert Shiller's ground-breaking rejection of the class of REH present-value models that rely on the consumption-based specification of the risk premium. The relevance of Knightian uncertainty is inconsistent with all REH models, regardless of how they specify the market's risk premium. The authors' evidence is also inconsistent with bubble accounts of REH models' empirical difficulties. They consider a present-value model based on a New Rational Expectations Hypothesis, which recognizes the relevance of Knightian uncertainty in driving outcomes in real-world markets. Their novel data is supportive of the model's implications that rational forecasting relies on both fundamental and psychological factors.
Volume (Year): 9 (2015)
Issue (Month): ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Kiellinie 66, D-24105 Kiel|
Phone: +49 431 8814-1
Fax: +49 431 8814528
Web page: http://www.economics-ejournal.org/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Roman Frydman & Michael Goldberg & Nicholas Mangee, 2015. "New Evidence for the Present-Value Model of Stock Prices: Why the REH Version Failed Empirically," Working Papers Series 2, Institute for New Economic Thinking.
- Nicholas Mangee, 2014. "Stock Prices, the Business Cycle and Contingent Change: Evidence from Bloomberg News Market Wraps," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 34(4), pages 2165-2178.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:ifweej:201524. See general 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.