http://news.msu.edu/story/5774/
MSU research: Genes may influence popularity
Contact: Andy Henion, University Relations, Office: (517) 355-3294, Cell: (517) 281-6949, mailto:Andy.Henion@ur.msu.edu?subject=MSU%20News&body=Title:%20MSU%20research%3A%20Genes%20may%20influence%20popularity%0A%0APublished%20Date:%20Dec.%2019,%202008%0A%09%09%09%09%09%0A%09%09%09%09%09%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%0A
Published: Dec. 19, 2008
Story
S. Alexandra Burt, assistant professor of psychology and behavioral geneticist
Click on an image to view a larger or high-resolution version.
EMBARGOED UNTIL 12:01 A.M. MONDAY, DEC. 22, 2008
EAST LANSING, Mich. — A groundbreaking study of popularity by a Michigan State University scientist has found that genes elicit not only specific behaviors but also the social consequences of those behaviors.>
According to the investigation by behavioral geneticist S. Alexandra Burt, male college students who had a gene associated with rule-breaking behavior were rated most popular by a group of previously unacquainted peers.>
It’s not unusual for adolescent rule-breakers to be well-liked – previous research has made that link – but Burt is the first to provide meaningful evidence for the role of a specific gene in this process. The study appears in the latest issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, which is published by the American Psychological Association.>
“The idea is that your genes predispose you to certain behaviors and those behaviors elicit different kinds of social reactions from others,” said Burt, assistant professor of psychology. “And so what’s happening is, your genes are to some extent driving your social experiences.”>
The concept – which researchers call “evocative gene-environment correlation” – had been discussed in scientific literature but only in theory. This study is the first to really flesh out the process, establishing clear connections between a specific gene, particular behaviors and actual social situations, she said.>
Burt collected DNA from more than 200 male college students in two separate samples. After interacting in a lab setting for about an hour, the students filled out a questionnaire about whom they most liked in their group. In both samples, the most popular students turned out to be the ones with a particular form of a serotonin gene that was also associated with rule-breaking behavior.>
“So the gene predisposed them to rule-breaking behavior and their rule-breaking behavior made them more popular,” Burt said.>
Burt is working on similar studies with female college students, as well as mixed-gender social groups. She also plans to explore associations with other social behaviors and other genes in larger samples.
###
***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.
Friday, December 19, 2008
The Fiendish Genius of Credit-Card Minimum Payments
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/12/17/the-fiendish-genius-of-credit-card-minimum-payments/
The New York Times
December 17, 2008, 1:12 pm — Updated: 1:25 pm -->
The Fiendish Genius of Credit-Card Minimum Payments
By Freakonomics
New research finds that credit-card holders pay down their debts more slowly when their statements suggest a minimum monthly installment. The Economist reports on the study, by University of Warwick psychologist Dr. Neil Stewart:>
Mr. Stewart presented 413 people with mock credit-card bills of £435.76 (about $650) that were identical — except that only half mentioned a minimum payment of £5.42. Participants were asked how much they would pay.>
Among those inclined to pay the bill in full, the presence of the minimum payment hardly made any difference. However, those who wanted to pay just part of it handed over 43 percent less on average when presented with a minimum payment. In the real world, this would roughly double interest charges.>
It turns out that, for those inclined to pay their debt bit by bit, the monthly minimum acts as a mental anchor, exerting an enormous amount of influence on how quickly that debt gets paid. >
Stewart found that as suggested minimums drop, actual payments fall right along with them, even among people who pay above that bottom limit. >
So the minimum payment can be a helpful tool for card holders. It gives them a guide on how much money to pay to keep their debt from exploding under compound interest. But it’s a much better deal for the companies that issue the cards.>
Say you’re a credit card company. You make money every time one of your card holders carries a balance at the end of the month, because you charge interest on that debt. A lot of interest. The longer your card holder carries debt, the more money you make. >
But if that debt tips out of control, and the card holder defaults, you lose everything. >
So you want to find a middle road, a strategy that will keep your card holder’s debt manageable, but that will stretch out repayment as far into the future as possible, maximizing your profits. >
Considering Stewart’s findings (paper available here), minimum monthly payments seem like the most surefire way down that middle path.
***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.
The New York Times
December 17, 2008, 1:12 pm — Updated: 1:25 pm -->
The Fiendish Genius of Credit-Card Minimum Payments
By Freakonomics
New research finds that credit-card holders pay down their debts more slowly when their statements suggest a minimum monthly installment. The Economist reports on the study, by University of Warwick psychologist Dr. Neil Stewart:>
Mr. Stewart presented 413 people with mock credit-card bills of £435.76 (about $650) that were identical — except that only half mentioned a minimum payment of £5.42. Participants were asked how much they would pay.>
Among those inclined to pay the bill in full, the presence of the minimum payment hardly made any difference. However, those who wanted to pay just part of it handed over 43 percent less on average when presented with a minimum payment. In the real world, this would roughly double interest charges.>
It turns out that, for those inclined to pay their debt bit by bit, the monthly minimum acts as a mental anchor, exerting an enormous amount of influence on how quickly that debt gets paid. >
Stewart found that as suggested minimums drop, actual payments fall right along with them, even among people who pay above that bottom limit. >
So the minimum payment can be a helpful tool for card holders. It gives them a guide on how much money to pay to keep their debt from exploding under compound interest. But it’s a much better deal for the companies that issue the cards.>
Say you’re a credit card company. You make money every time one of your card holders carries a balance at the end of the month, because you charge interest on that debt. A lot of interest. The longer your card holder carries debt, the more money you make. >
But if that debt tips out of control, and the card holder defaults, you lose everything. >
So you want to find a middle road, a strategy that will keep your card holder’s debt manageable, but that will stretch out repayment as far into the future as possible, maximizing your profits. >
Considering Stewart’s findings (paper available here), minimum monthly payments seem like the most surefire way down that middle path.
***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.
Companies with the Most Aggressive Accounting Have Higher Stock Compensation and Share Repurchases, Audit Integrity Finds
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Companies-Most-Aggressive-Accounting-Have/story.aspx?guid=%7B827295ED-29AB-4BD5-8DD8-254D0857DB7D%7D
Companies with the Most Aggressive Accounting Have Higher Stock Compensation and Share Repurchases, Audit Integrity Finds>
Alarming Correlation Suggests Some Share Repurchase Programs May Ultimately Benefit Management at the Expense of Shareholders >
Last update: 9:00 a.m. EST Dec. 18, 2008
LOS ANGELES, Dec 18, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- U.S. corporations with the most aggressive accounting are dramatically more likely to offer generous stock options for their top managers and engage in share buyback programs, according to a study made public today by Audit Integrity, an independent research firm that gauges corporate integrity risk. >
Almost 50 percent of companies whose accounting Audit Integrity deems "very aggressive" offer lucrative stock awards to their senior managers and engage in share repurchase programs. By comparison, only six percent of companies with conservative accounting offer share repurchase programs. >
Although touted as a tax efficient tool to return cash to shareholders when a stock is trading below its intrinsic value, Audit Integrity warns that share repurchases can unjustly benefit company management at the expense of shareholders. Many share repurchase programs do not have the stated intent of improving the stock price, but rather improve the metrics that many executive incentive plans are tied to, or benefit option holders more than shareholders. Accelerated share repurchase programs, where the ultimate price is determined at the settlement of a forward contract, can be particularly costly to shareholders. >
"We have consistently found share repurchase plans to be linked to aggressive, self-serving management behavior," said Jack Zwingli, president and CEO of Audit Integrity. "While share repurchase programs can benefit shareholders, we are too often seeing them be used as a tool for manipulating per share earnings so that CEOs and other top executives can bolster incentive-based compensation. Good corporate governance dictates that boards critically analyze proposed share repurchases to ensure that they are ultimately serving the best interests of shareholders." >
Among the more than 50 publicly traded corporations that Audit Integrity has identified as very aggressive with high levels of incentive-based compensation and share repurchase programs are:
-- Parker-Hannifin Corporation
-- KLA-Tencor Corporation
-- CA, Inc.
-- Alliance Data Systems Corporation
-- Mirant Corporation
-- Marchex, Inc.
-- Cisco Systems, Inc.
-- Amgen, Inc >
Audit Integrity's study is based on a review of its risk ratings and database on over 7,000 North American corporations. Audit Integrity tracks many accounting and governance risk factors, and was able to identify which companies have had both a recent share repurchase program as well as the worst risk ratings.
Audit Integrity's study is available on AuditIntegrity.com, or by contacting the company at 877-44-AUDIT. >
About Audit Integrity
Founded in 2002, serving investors, insurers, auditors and corporate finance professionals, Audit Integrity is a leading independent research firm that rates more than 7,000 public companies based on their corporate integrity. In addition to its flagship Accounting and Governance Risk (AGR) ratings, Audit Integrity also forecasts class action litigation risk, material financial restatement risk, and equity performance risk. The statistical correlation of these ratings has been confirmed by internal and third-party tests. Audit Integrity has offices in Los Angeles and New York City. For more information, please visit www.auditintegrity.com >
SOURCE: Audit Integrity Starkman & Associates Jeffrey Richardson, 212-252-8545, ext. 11 jrichardson@starkmanpr.com or James Cheston, 212-252-8545, ext. jcheston@starkmanpr.com
Copyright Business Wire 2008
***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.
Companies with the Most Aggressive Accounting Have Higher Stock Compensation and Share Repurchases, Audit Integrity Finds>
Alarming Correlation Suggests Some Share Repurchase Programs May Ultimately Benefit Management at the Expense of Shareholders >
Last update: 9:00 a.m. EST Dec. 18, 2008
LOS ANGELES, Dec 18, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- U.S. corporations with the most aggressive accounting are dramatically more likely to offer generous stock options for their top managers and engage in share buyback programs, according to a study made public today by Audit Integrity, an independent research firm that gauges corporate integrity risk. >
Almost 50 percent of companies whose accounting Audit Integrity deems "very aggressive" offer lucrative stock awards to their senior managers and engage in share repurchase programs. By comparison, only six percent of companies with conservative accounting offer share repurchase programs. >
Although touted as a tax efficient tool to return cash to shareholders when a stock is trading below its intrinsic value, Audit Integrity warns that share repurchases can unjustly benefit company management at the expense of shareholders. Many share repurchase programs do not have the stated intent of improving the stock price, but rather improve the metrics that many executive incentive plans are tied to, or benefit option holders more than shareholders. Accelerated share repurchase programs, where the ultimate price is determined at the settlement of a forward contract, can be particularly costly to shareholders. >
"We have consistently found share repurchase plans to be linked to aggressive, self-serving management behavior," said Jack Zwingli, president and CEO of Audit Integrity. "While share repurchase programs can benefit shareholders, we are too often seeing them be used as a tool for manipulating per share earnings so that CEOs and other top executives can bolster incentive-based compensation. Good corporate governance dictates that boards critically analyze proposed share repurchases to ensure that they are ultimately serving the best interests of shareholders." >
Among the more than 50 publicly traded corporations that Audit Integrity has identified as very aggressive with high levels of incentive-based compensation and share repurchase programs are:
-- Parker-Hannifin Corporation
-- KLA-Tencor Corporation
-- CA, Inc.
-- Alliance Data Systems Corporation
-- Mirant Corporation
-- Marchex, Inc.
-- Cisco Systems, Inc.
-- Amgen, Inc >
Audit Integrity's study is based on a review of its risk ratings and database on over 7,000 North American corporations. Audit Integrity tracks many accounting and governance risk factors, and was able to identify which companies have had both a recent share repurchase program as well as the worst risk ratings.
Audit Integrity's study is available on AuditIntegrity.com, or by contacting the company at 877-44-AUDIT. >
About Audit Integrity
Founded in 2002, serving investors, insurers, auditors and corporate finance professionals, Audit Integrity is a leading independent research firm that rates more than 7,000 public companies based on their corporate integrity. In addition to its flagship Accounting and Governance Risk (AGR) ratings, Audit Integrity also forecasts class action litigation risk, material financial restatement risk, and equity performance risk. The statistical correlation of these ratings has been confirmed by internal and third-party tests. Audit Integrity has offices in Los Angeles and New York City. For more information, please visit www.auditintegrity.com >
SOURCE: Audit Integrity Starkman & Associates Jeffrey Richardson, 212-252-8545, ext. 11 jrichardson@starkmanpr.com or James Cheston, 212-252-8545, ext. jcheston@starkmanpr.com
Copyright Business Wire 2008
***********************************************************************
This posting was made my Jim Jacobs, President & CEO of Jacobs Executive Advisors. Jim also serves as Leader of Jacobs Advisors' Insurance Practice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)