2016
DOI: 10.33736/uraf.292.2016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Heterogeneity of Sentiment Risk in Malaysian Stock Market

Abstract: Behavioral risks including investor sentiment plays an important roles in Asia’s stock market behaviors but theoretically and empirically not well understood in traditional conditional means statistic partly due to its heterogeneity roles. In contrast to the existing studies, this paper examine the heterogeneity roles of investor sentiment proxies (i.e. CSI, BCS, and FKLI) in influencing various aggregate stock market indices in Malaysia. The proposed sentiment proxies relation to stock returns are statistical… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 77 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The literature on emerging markets and also Asian markets is not as extensive as developed markets. It is important to manage more investigation on investor sentiment in Asians market especially in Malaysia market to provide knowledge for the global investor since lack in the literature (Tuyon, Ahmad & Ghazali, 2016). Besides that, people cultures in Asian might have a greater level of behavioural biases due to a variety of cultures than other countries (Kim & Nofsinger, 2008).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The literature on emerging markets and also Asian markets is not as extensive as developed markets. It is important to manage more investigation on investor sentiment in Asians market especially in Malaysia market to provide knowledge for the global investor since lack in the literature (Tuyon, Ahmad & Ghazali, 2016). Besides that, people cultures in Asian might have a greater level of behavioural biases due to a variety of cultures than other countries (Kim & Nofsinger, 2008).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%