1995
DOI: 10.21034/dp.102
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Equity Premium: It's Still a Puzzle

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
326
2
3

Year Published

1998
1998
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 262 publications
(339 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
8
326
2
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Type 1, type 3, and type 2 individuals appear particularly more able than other types. A deeper analysis of the correlation between ability and realized schooling attainments is delayed to Section 5. subjective discount rate, 0.0299, appears quite reasonable and is close to estimates reported in the financial economics literature; see Kocherlakota (1996). The wage and employment returns to schooling are found in Table IV.…”
Section: The Role Of Unobserved Ability In Explaining Schooling Attsupporting
confidence: 83%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Type 1, type 3, and type 2 individuals appear particularly more able than other types. A deeper analysis of the correlation between ability and realized schooling attainments is delayed to Section 5. subjective discount rate, 0.0299, appears quite reasonable and is close to estimates reported in the financial economics literature; see Kocherlakota (1996). The wage and employment returns to schooling are found in Table IV.…”
Section: The Role Of Unobserved Ability In Explaining Schooling Attsupporting
confidence: 83%
“…Not surprisingly, we find that internal rates are higher for those with high ability (type 1, type 3, and type 2) than for those with low ability (type 4, type 5, and type 6). Overall, these internal rates are comparable to rates of return on risky investments (Kocherlakota (1996)).…”
Section: Internal Rate Of Return To Four Year Collegementioning
confidence: 72%
“…Most of this literature, of which Telmer (1993), Lucas (1994), and Heaton and Lucas (1996) are representative, provides numerical solutions to models calibrated to observed parameters. (Kocherlakota (1996) provides an excellent and intuitive discussion of the numerical findings.) This literature generally concludes that market incompleteness alone is not sufficient to explain the quantitative features of the data.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Appendix E. A Comment on Preferences Estimates Table 4 shows that the estimates are economically reasonable across both sexes. For instance, the relative risk aversion coefficients in the literature vary from 1 to 6, or higher depending on the context (Mehra and Prescott, 1985;Kocherlakota, 1996;Chetty, 2006). Our average estimate of c is roughly 4.52 for males and 3.69 for females.…”
Section: ]mentioning
confidence: 81%