Management earnings forecasts and IPO performance: evidence of a regime change

Companies undertaking initial public offerings (IPOs) in Greece were obliged to include next-year profit forecast in their prospectuses, until the regulation changed in 2001 to voluntary forecasting. Drawing evidence from IPOs issued in the period 1993–2015, this is the first study to investigate the effect of disclosure regime on management earnings forecasts and IPO long-term performance. The findings show mainly positive forecast errors (forecasts are lower than actual earnings) and higher long-term returns during the mandatory period, suggesting that the mandatory disclosure requirement causes issuers to systematically bias profit forecasts downwards as they opt for the safety of accounting conservatism. The mandatory disclosure requirement artificially improves IPO share performance. Overall, our results show that mandatory disclosure of earnings forecasts can impede capital market efficiency once it goes beyond historical financial information to involve compulsory projections of future performance

Evidence and morality in harm-reduction debates: can we use value-neutral arguments to achieve value-driven goals?

It is common to argue that politicians make selective use of evidence to tacitly reinforce their moral positions, but all stakeholders combine facts and values to produce and use research for policy. The drug policy debate has largely been framed in terms of an opposition between evidence and politics. Focusing on harm reduction provides useful ground to discuss a further opposition proposed by evidence advocates, that between evidence and morality. Can evidence sway individuals from their existing moral positions, so as to “neutralise” morality? And if not, then should evidence advocates change the way in which they frame their arguments? To address these questions, analysis of N=27 interviews with stakeholders involved in drug policy and harm reduction research, advocacy, lobbying, implementation and decision-making in England, UK and New South Wales, Australia, was conducted. Participants’ accounts suggest that although evidence can help focus discussions away from values and principles, exposure to evidence does not necessarily change deeply held views. Whether stakeholders decide to go with the evidence or not seems contingent on whether they embrace a view of evidence as secular faith; a view that is shaped by experience, politics, training, and role. And yet, morality, values, and emotions underpin all stakeholders’ views, motivating their commitment to drug policy and harm reduction. Evidence advocates might thus benefit from morally and emotionally engaging audiences. This paper aims to develop better tools for analysing the role of morality in decision-making, starting with moral foundations theory. Using tools from disciplines such as moral psychology is relevant to the study of the politics of evidence-based policymaking

HOW DO STUDENTS PERCIEVE AND APPRECIATE “FAILURE” DURING UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH?

Since 2011 we have conducted Authentic Large-scale Undergraduate Research Experiences (ALURES) with our Sophomore and Junior biochemistry cohorts - so far over 1000 students have participated.The students in 2011-2014 wrote reflections about their experiences mid-semester and/or at the end of semester. Their writing indicates a growing awareness of the value of failure and struggle, as well as a healthy respect for the power of peer support and interaction.We asked the question “what do our students see as a “failure”, and does their understanding of the value of struggle change as a result of the ALURE experience?In 2015 we are conducting a longitudinal study of our ALURE students as they progress through the semester – the students have completed a series of five semi-structured interviews and the URSSA survey. We are examining their development of research and scientific literacy through the lens of productive failure.Our results indicate that although we feel we are designing productive failure into our undergraduate research experiences, we do not appear to be providing a high enough sense of risk or responsibility. This means that the students do not experience a sense of struggle or project ownership with the authenticity we desire. This is causing us to redesign our ALURE offerings

A ‘how-to' guide for producing recorded interviews

This guide was used to help students interview a working scientist of their choosing as part of a course that addressed employability. We asked students to complete their interview alone (but other academics may easily use this activity for a student pair or trio). We do not recommend asking more than three students to work together on an interview, as larger groups increase the possibility of conflict and disorganization around writing, interview content, and editing

On the biomedicalisation of the penis: the commodification of function and aesthetics

This paper explores contemporary understandings and representations of the penis. It presents an overview of recent trends which re-frame long-standing penile anxieties within a new hybrid world of health and aesthetics. It explores these apparent changes through the lens of biomedicalisation. By focusing on constructions of masculinities in crisis, changes in the representability of the penis and the effects of Viagra, it suggests that contemporary penile pathologies and anxieties are being constructed and commodified. In the past medical discourse has focused primarily upon the ‘traditional’ functionality of the penis, more recently it has focussed upon pharmaceutical innovations such as Viagra. However, we suggest that now there appears to be the emergence of a new penile discourse, a penile aesthetic that focuses upon penile appearance as much as function. This shift has been facilitated by the Internet, the deregulation of pornography and changes in sexual mores