文献类型：期刊文献

中文题名：基于相对熵的证券市场参与者对监管的态度偏好研究

英文题名：Study on the Attitude Preference of the Market Participant for the Security Regulatory Effect Based on Relative Entropy

作者：张士玉[1];郝旭光[2]

第一作者：张士玉

机构：[1]北京联合大学管理学院;[2]对外经济贸易大学国际商学院

第一机构：北京联合大学管理学院

年份：2014

卷号：0

期号：9

起止页码：27-35

中文期刊名：中央财经大学学报

外文期刊名：Journal of Central University of Finance & Economics

收录：CSTPCD;;国家哲学社会科学学术期刊数据库;北大核心:【北大核心2011】；CSSCI:【CSSCI2014_2016】；

基金：国家社科基金重点项目"我国资本市场系统稳定性评估和监测研究"(11AZD010)

语种：中文

中文关键词：相对熵;偏好;证券监管

外文关键词：Relative entropy Preference Security regulatory

摘要：在研究参与者对于证券监管效果的评价时,现有的常规方法难以反映人类思维的整体性和偏好性。笔者引入了熵理论中基于相对熵的偏好量模型,根据问卷调查数据的特征进行拓展,并构造了度量不同群体在整体上的数据分布差异的参数。据此分析市场参与者对于证券监管效果在5个方面的评价,发现影响监管效果评价的主要矛盾。笔者提出,尽管对证券市场监管效果从总体上的评价程度和偏好程度都较低,但是对于缓解股市暴跌的政策效果评价和偏好都明显较高。依据这种方法,笔者发现了运用方差分析所未发现的各群体之间差异性。根据各群体的共同诉求以及监管者与上市公司的意见态度最接近这个主要特征,提出了政策建议。
It is difficult for existing conventional methods to reflect the integrity and preference of human mind in the study on bow to evaluate the effect of security regulatory. This paper introduced preference quantity model based on relative entropy in the theory of entropy, expanded it according to the data characteristics in the questionnaire survey and constructed parameters which could measure the data distribution difference among different groups. Based on these, the paper analyzed the market participants＇ the evaluation on five aspects of security regulatory effects and found the main contradiction that can influence the evaluation on security regulatory effects. This paper put forward that though the degree of preference and evaluation on security regulatory effect was low, as policy effects which ease the stock market crash was considered, the degree was obviously high. Based on this method, this paper found the difference among groups which couldn＇t be found by using variance analysis, namely the brokers group＇s being straying. However, the regulators group and the public company group are more general. Therefore, based on the characteristics that different groups have common appealing and opinions as well as attitudes between regulators and listed companies are the most similar, some recommendations on policy were given.