本文探讨了我国证券市场中开放式基金投资者投资行为的影响因素。结果表明，基金投资者在买卖基金的份额时，除了关注基金的业绩外，前一段时间基金业绩波动幅度的大小、投资者申购或赎回份额的多少与投资者当前的买卖行为显著地正相关；同时，基金申购与赎回费率的高低、管理费用的大小、以及上市时间的长短都会对投资者申购或赎回行为产生显著的负面影响。

所谓超联动（excess comovement）是指不同资产价格或回报之间的正相关程度超出了基本面经济因素所能解释的范围，其在很大程度上反映了金融市场的非理性成分。超联动效应是金融市场中普遍存在的现象，并由于其对于投资决策和金融监管的重要意义，故一直以来为西方金融学者所重视，相应的研究成果很多。但是在国内，相关的研究却进展缓慢，尚处于萌芽起步阶段。因此，本文欲基于行为金融的视角，从内涵、机理成因、测量方法、实证研究等角度，对当前西方股票市场回报超联动研究成果做一个综述性研究；同时对超联动研究的进一步发展方向及其对国内学者的启示进行了探讨。希望借此能推动该领域研究在国内的进一步发展。

本文采用随机占优的方法，从理论上研究损失厌恶是否可以解释“好消息提前，坏消息延后”的现象。得到的结论是尽管损失厌恶可以很好的解释个体“好消息提前”的行为，但单纯的损失厌恶特征并不能解释“坏消息延后”的现象，其原因在于不确定的消息所隐含的可能发生的损失将大大减少厌恶损失的个体的期望效用。随后，本文进一步对该结论进行了讨论，并探索性的给出了可能产生“坏消息延后”的另外一些原因。

本文用结构化模型对长电债进行了详细的实证定价分析，研究发现运用结构化模型所得到的长电债理论价格大于实际交易价格，产生这一价格差异的原因可能包括模型缺陷、流动性风险、债券存在嵌入期权等。此外，本文还发现资产价值波动率、违约门槛值、相关系数、回收率等参数估计值、无风险利率数据样本及回售期权对长电债的理论价格影响较小；而负债价值的估计值、利率模型（无风险利率为常数利率）和担保条款对长电债的理论价格影响较大。

本文在综合和归纳已有文献的基础上，考察了汇率制度选择研究中所采用的社会福利标准和微观福利标准的基本内涵、由社会福利向微观福利标准演变的基本动因以及两种不同标准之间的内在逻辑关系。本文指出，由于汇率制度选择标准的发展演变，没有任何一种汇率制度能适用于一国的所有时期，任何国家的汇率制度选择也会因此而呈现出一种动态变迁的过程。

汇率制度选择研究历来就是在标准的分析框架下，根据不同的制度选择标准进行的，恰当的分析框架和合理的选择标准缺一不可。在分析框架上，主流汇率制度选择理论经历了M-F-D范式向新开放经济宏观经济学范式的演变；在制度选择标准上，则经历了宏观稳定性标准向微观的福利标准的发展演变历程。本文对此做了扼要的回顾。最后对以后的研究提出了一些建议，并指出了已有研究对我国人民币汇率制度选择和进一步完善的指导意义。

本文首先阐述了中小金融机构在对中小企业融资上的“小银行优势”，之后以民生银行在2000年转变市场定位为引，探讨了当前我国中小金融机构未能给予中小企业足够金融支持的原因。作者认为，中小金融机构仍然是中小企业融资的最佳方式，并大胆地提出了通过立法限制中小金融机构的经营地域和发展规模及限制其为大企业融资等若干建议。

In this paper, we provide an overview of the subprime mortgage securitization process and the seven key informational frictions that arise. We discuss the ways that market participants work to minimize these frictions and speculate on how this process broke down. We continue with a complete picture of the subprime borrower and the subprime loan, discussing both predatory borrowing and predatory lending. We present the key structural features of a typical subprime securitization, document how rating agencies assign credit ratings to mortgage-backed securities, and outline how these agencies monitor the performance of mortgage pools over time. Throughout the paper, we draw upon the example of a mortgage pool securitized by New Century Financial during 2006.

We study the effects of Chinese monetary policy shocks on China's major trading partners in East Asia by estimating structural vector autoregressive (SVAR) models for six economies in the region. We find that a monetary expansion in Mainland China leads to an increase in real GDP (temporary) and the price level (permanent) in a number of economies in our sample, most notably in Hong Kong and the Philippines. The impact could result from intertemporal substitution present in a general equilibrium framework which allows for positive domestic impacts of foreign monetary expansions. Our results emphasize the growing importance of China for its neighboring economies and the significance of Chinese shocks for the design of monetary policy in Asian economies.

Chinese authorities have traditionally relied mainly on administrative and quantitative measures in conducting monetary policy, with interest rates playing a less prominent role. Additional support for this view resides in a number of earlier studies that have found that the impact of interest rates on the real economy has been miniscule. However, taking into account numerous reforms in the financial sector and more widely in the Chinese economy, interest rates may have gained some influence in the last few years. It is important to study the effectiveness of interest rates also in light of future reforms of the monetary policy tools in China. Whereas administrative policy measures were effective in guiding the behaviour of state-owned enterprises, the authorities may need to increase the use of more market-oriented monetary policy tools as the share of the economy in private and foreign ownership grows. We use a vector error correction model to study, within a credit demand framework, whether the impact of interest rates in China has become stronger over the last decade. Our results suggest that loan demand has indeed become more dependent on interest rates, albeit the channel from interest rate to the real economy is still weak.