Search

In this article we present some empirical evidence which indicates that attempts to represent the probability distribution of the rates of return on common stocks by a member of the stable Paretian family of distributions, with 1 < alpha < 2, may be misleadingand in fact may not produce an adequate fit to observed rates of return. We offer an alternative probability model for describing rates of return based on the hypothesized phenomenon of a changing variance. We test the "goodness of fit" of our model vis-a-vis a stable Paretian model for several series of rates of return, Finally we propose an extension of the stability test of Fama and Roll [6]. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Returns and findings from three strategies of data collection are compared. Each strategy contains personal interviews, telephone interviews, and mail questionnaires in different combinations--one mainly personal, one mainly telephone, and one mainly mail. All three strategies are based on area probability samples of households in Alameda County, California. The test was made on two separate studies, with identical questionnaires used in all strategies within each study. The responses from the three strategies were found to be highly comparable. Rate of return and rate of completeness of questionnaires were high for all three; substantive findings were virtually interchangeable; and there was little difference in validity. The only important difference was cost per interview which varied considerably by strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]