 Reply: Comments on “The use of statistical techniques in the interpretation and implementation of South African insider trading legislation”D Botha South African Journal of Accounting Research, 1997, vol. 11, issue 2, 101-109 Abstract: This is a response to critical comments by Van Der Honert & Barr (1997), reported in this volume, relating to an earlier paper (Botha 1995). Van Der Honert & Barr assert that two blemishes in the reasoning and the model need to be ‘...rigorously addressed and resolved’. This reply argues and submits that Van Der Honert & Ban have not only attributed an incorrect assumption to the reasoning in the original paper, but do not seem to have taken cognisance of a crucial study (Meulbrook 1992), cited in the original paper, the results of which form the basis of the actual stated assumption of the original paper. Furthermore, their comments in regard to some issues of evidence indicate a misplaced understanding of the functions, and practice and procedures of our criminal courts. Thus, the two aspects which form the basis of the criticism by Van Der Honert & Barr, are clearly not of such a nature that, in relation to the proposed event study technique, they would ‘ ...mitigate against it becoming a satisfactory tool in a court of law’, as Van Der Honert & Barr have attempted to claim. Date: 1997 Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:rsarxx:v:11:y:1997:i:2:p:101-109 Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from DOI: 10.1080/10291954.1997.11435076 Access Statistics for this article South African Journal of Accounting Research is currently edited by Soon Nel More articles in South African Journal of Accounting Research from Taylor & Francis Journals |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.