Comment on “Regulating Gender Diversity: Evidence from California Senate Bill 826”
References
- (2012) The changing of the boards: The impact on firm valuation of mandated female board representation. Quart. J. Econom. 127(1):137–197.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2024) Regulating gender diversity: Evidence from California senate bill 826. Management Sci. 70(4):2023–2046.Link, Google Scholar
- (1997) On persistence in mutual fund performance. J. Finance 52(1):57–82.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (1989) A nonparametric test for abnormal security-price performance in event studies. J. Financial Econom. 23(2):385–395.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (1992) The specification and power of the sign test in event study hypothesis tests using daily stock returns. J. Financial Quant. Anal. 27(3):465–478.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (1992) Nonparametric event study tests. Rev. Quant. Finance Accounting 2(4):343–358.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2020) Notes for empirical finance (presentation slides). Preprint, submitted July 30, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3658557.Google Scholar
- (2022) Valuation effects of Norway’s board gender-quota law revisited. Management Sci. 68(6):4112–4134.Link, Google Scholar
- (1993) Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. J. Financial Econom. 33(1):3–56.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2025) Gender quotas and support for women in board elections. Working paper, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
- (2020) Do board gender quotas affect firm value? Evidence from California Senate Bill No. 826. J. Corporate Finance 60:101526.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2026) How deep is the labor market for female directors? Evidence from mandated director appointments. Working paper, Clemson University, Clemson, SC.Google Scholar
- (2018) Mandating gender diversity in the corporate boardroom: The inevitable failure of California’s SB 826. Working paper, Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
- (2019) Which factors? Rev. Finance 23(1):1–35.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2021) Mandating women on boards: Evidence from the United States. Working paper, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.Google Scholar
- (1974) The effect of regulation changes on insider trading. Bell J. Econom. Management Sci. 5(1):93–121.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2022) EVENTSTUDY2: Stata module to perform event studies with complex test statistics. Statistical Software Components S458086, Boston College, Department of Economics, Boston.Google Scholar
- (2010) Event study testing with cross-sectional correlation of abnormal returns. Rev. Financial Stud. 23(11):3996–4025.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2011) Nonparametric rank tests for event studies. J. Empirical Finance 18(5):953–971.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2007) Econometrics of event studies. Handbook of Corporate Finance: Empirical Corporate Finance (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 3–36.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2020) Factoring characteristics into returns: A clinical study on the SMB and HML portfolio construction methods. J. Banking Finance 114:105811.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (1976) Corporate forecasts of earnings per share and stock price behavior: Empirical test. J. Accounting Res. 14(2):246–276.Crossref, Google Scholar
- (2021) Firm characteristics and empirical factor models: A model-mining experiment. Rev. Financial Stud. 34(12):6087–6125. Google Scholar
- (2025) As California goes, so goes the nation? Board gender quotas and shareholders’ distaste of government interventions. Working paper, University of Zurich, Zurich.Google Scholar
- (1945) Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics Bull. 1(6):80–83.Crossref, Google Scholar

