IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mar/magkse/201454.html

Rating Agencies: An Experimental Analysis of their Remuneration Model

Author

Listed:
  • Christoph Buehren

    (University of Kassel)

  • Marco Plessner

Abstract

Does it matter who pays for ratings? Yes, but not for the rating agencies' behavior. These are the findings of our experiment where we analyze the effect of the remuneration model of rating agencies on their assessments as well as on investors' and issuers' behavior. First, we find that rating agencies' assessments are comparable whether the agency is (partially) paid by issuers, investors, or solely by the experimenter. Issuers, on the other hand, more often do not return investor's trust when they or investors pay for ratings. Further, investors more often act according to the agencies' recommendations when they have to pay for this information.Does it matter who pays for ratings? Yes, but not for the rating agencies' behavior. These are the findings of our experiment where we analyze the effect of the remuneration model of rating agencies on their assessments as well as on investors' and issuers' behavior. First, we find that rating agencies' assessments are comparable whether the agency is (partially) paid by issuers, investors, or solely by the experimenter. Issuers, on the other hand, more often do not return investor's trust when they or investors pay for ratings. Further, investors more often act according to the agencies' recommendations when they have to pay for this information.

Suggested Citation

  • Christoph Buehren & Marco Plessner, 2014. "Rating Agencies: An Experimental Analysis of their Remuneration Model," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201454, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    • Handle: RePEc:mar:magkse:201454
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.uni-marburg.de/fb02/makro/forschung/magkspapers/54-2014_buehren.pdf
    File Function: First 201454
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ann-Renée Blais & Elke U. Weber, 2006. "A Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DOSPERT)Scale for Adult Populations," CIRANO Working Papers 2006s-24, CIRANO.
    2. Nelson Camanho & Pragyan Deb & Zijun Liu, 2022. "Credit rating and competition," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(3), pages 2873-2897, July.
    3. Ann-Renée Blais & Elke U. Weber, 2006. "A Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DOSPERT) scale for adult populations," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 1, pages 33-47, July.
    4. Daylian M. Cain & George Loewenstein & Don A. Moore, 2011. "When Sunlight Fails to Disinfect: Understanding the Perverse Effects of Disclosing Conflicts of Interest," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(5), pages 836-857.
    5. Daylian M. Cain & George Loewenstein & Don A. Moore, 2005. "The Dirt on Coming Clean: Perverse Effects of Disclosing Conflicts of Interest," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(1), pages 1-25, January.
    6. Duff, Angus & Einig, Sandra, 2009. "Credit ratings quality: The perceptions of market participants and other interested parties," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 141-153.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ranganathan, Kavitha & Lejarraga, Tomás, 2021. "Elicitation of risk preferences through satisficing," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    2. Bose, Neha & Sgroi, Daniel, 2019. "The Role of Theory of Mind and “Small Talk” Communication in Strategic Decision-Making," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 409, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    3. Ismayilov, Huseyn & Potters, Jan, 2013. "Disclosing advisor's interests neither hurts nor helps," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 314-320.
    4. Effron, Daniel A. & Raj, Medha, 2021. "Disclosing interpersonal conflicts of interest: Revealing whom we like, but not whom we dislike," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 68-85.
    5. James Alm & Antoine Malézieux, 2021. "40 years of tax evasion games: a meta-analysis," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(3), pages 699-750, September.
    6. Humaira Mumtaz & Iqbal Javed & Allah Bakhsh, 2019. "Impact of Psychological Consequences on Poverty: An Evidence from Pakistan," Journal of Economic Impact, Science Impact Publishers, vol. 1(3), pages 70-79.
    7. Debapriya Jojo Paul & Julia Henker & Sian Owen, 2019. "The aggregate impacts of tournament incentives in experimental asset markets," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 441-476, June.
    8. Gürdal, Mehmet Y. & Kuzubaş, Tolga U. & Saltoğlu, Burak, 2017. "Measures of individual risk attitudes and portfolio choice: Evidence from pension participants," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 186-203.
    9. Christoph Buehren & Tim Meyer & Christian Pierdzioch, 2020. "Experimental Evidence on Forecaster (anti-) Herding in Sports Markets," MAGKS Papers on Economics 202038, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    10. Ploner, Matteo & Saredi, Viola, 2020. "Exploration and delegation in risky choices," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    11. Baert, Stijn, 2015. "Hiring a Homosexual, Taking a Risk? A Lab Experiment on Employment Discrimination and Risk Aversion," IZA Discussion Papers 9536, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Nguyen, Thi Tuyet Mai, 2017. "An examination of independent directors in Vietnam," OSF Preprints ay6dv, Center for Open Science.
    13. Kelishomi, Ali Moghaddasi & Sgroi, Daniel, 2022. "The Relationship between Cognitive Ability and Risk Preferences in a Developing Nation: Findings from the Field," IZA Discussion Papers 15266, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Tamás Csermely & Alexander Rabas, 2016. "How to reveal people’s preferences: Comparing time consistency and predictive power of multiple price list risk elicitation methods," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 107-136, December.
    15. Crystal Reeck & O’Dhaniel A Mullette-Gillman & R Edward McLaurin & Scott A Huettel, 2022. "Beyond money: Risk preferences across both economic and non-economic contexts predict financial decisions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(12), pages 1-12, December.
    16. Sterkens, Philippe & Baert, Stijn & Rooman, Claudia & Derous, Eva, 2021. "As if it weren’t hard enough already: Breaking down hiring discrimination following burnout," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    17. Renato Frey & Shannon M. Duncan & Elke U. Weber, 2023. "Towards a typology of risk preference: Four risk profiles describe two-thirds of individuals in a large sample of the U.S. population," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 1-17, February.
    18. Joshua Tasoff & Wenjie Zhang, 2022. "The Performance of Time-Preference and Risk-Preference Measures in Surveys," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 1149-1173, February.
    19. Willebrands, Daan & Lammers, Judith & Hartog, Joop, 2012. "A successful businessman is not a gambler. Risk attitude and business performance among small enterprises in Nigeria," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 342-354.
    20. Gary Charness & Thomas Garcia & Theo Offerman & Marie Claire Villeval, 2020. "Do measures of risk attitude in the laboratory predict behavior under risk in and outside of the laboratory?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 99-123, April.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:mar:magkse:201454. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Bernd Hayo (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vamarde.html .

    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.