Corporate Earnings Calls and Analyst Beliefs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.15214v2
• Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2025 18:42:49 GMT
• Title: Corporate Earnings Calls and Analyst Beliefs
• Abstract summary: I show that narratives extracted from earnings calls significantly improve the prediction of both realized earnings and analyst expectations.<n>I introduce a novel text-morphing methodology in which large language models generate counterfactual transcripts.<n>The results reveal systematic biases: analysts over-react to sentiment (optimism) and under-react to narratives of risk and uncertainty.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Economic behavior is shaped not only by quantitative information but also by the narratives through which such information is communicated and interpreted (Shiller, 2017). I show that narratives extracted from earnings calls significantly improve the prediction of both realized earnings and analyst expectations. To uncover the underlying mechanisms, I introduce a novel text-morphing methodology in which large language models generate counterfactual transcripts that systematically vary topical emphasis (the prevailing narrative) while holding quantitative content fixed. This framework allows me to precisely measure how analysts under- and over-react to specific narrative dimensions. The results reveal systematic biases: analysts over-react to sentiment (optimism) and under-react to narratives of risk and uncertainty. Overall, the analysis offers a granular perspective on the mechanisms of expectation formation through the competing narratives embedded in corporate communication.

Related papers

• How Data Narratives Go Wrong: A Taxonomy of Issues Across the Data Communication Process [26.086155122956132]
  Data narratives emerge through a broader meaning-making process.<n>TIC organizes recurring breakdowns across six dimensions-data, analysis, visual encoding, text, reasoning, and interpretation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-12T00:54:15Z)
• Reading Between the Tokens: Improving Preference Predictions through Mechanistic Forecasting [8.075670640219784]
  We investigate how demographic and ideological information activates latent party-encoding components within large language models.<n>We find that leveraging this internal knowledge via mechanistic forecasting can improve prediction accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-02T22:39:06Z)
• Explaining News Bias Detection: A Comparative SHAP Analysis of Transformer Model Decision Mechanisms [0.2538209532048867]
  We present a comparative interpretability study of two bias detection models: a bias detector fine-tuned on the BABE dataset and a domain-adapted pre-trained RoBERTa model fine-tuned on the BABE dataset.<n>We analyze word-level attributions across correct and incorrect predictions to characterize how different model architectures operationalize linguistic bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-29T19:58:11Z)
• RETuning: Upgrading Inference-Time Scaling for Stock Movement Prediction with Large Language Models [37.97736341087795]
  We study a three-class classification problem (up, hold, down) and observe that large language models (LLMs) follow analysts' opinions rather than exhibit a systematic, independent analytical logic (CoTs)<n>We propose Reflective Evidence Tuning (RETuning), a cold-start method prior to reinforcement learning, to enhance prediction ability.<n>We build a large-scale dataset spanning all of 2024 for 5,123 A-share stocks, with long contexts (32K tokens) and over 200K samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-24T16:08:33Z)
• Latent Topic Synthesis: Leveraging LLMs for Electoral Ad Analysis [51.95395936342771]
  We introduce an end-to-end framework for automatically generating an interpretable topic taxonomy from an unlabeled corpus.<n>We apply this framework to a large corpus of Meta political ads from the month ahead of the 2024 U.S. Presidential election.<n>Our approach uncovers latent discourse structures, synthesizes semantically rich topic labels, and annotates topics with moral framing dimensions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-16T20:30:20Z)
• Liaozhai through the Looking-Glass: On Paratextual Explicitation of Culture-Bound Terms in Machine Translation [70.43884512651668]
  We formalize Genette's (1987) theory of paratexts from literary and translation studies to introduce the task of paratextual explicitation for machine translation.<n>We construct a dataset of 560 expert-aligned paratexts from four English translations of the classical Chinese short story collection Liaozhai.<n>Our findings demonstrate the potential of paratextual explicitation in advancing machine translation beyond linguistic equivalence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-27T16:27:36Z)
• TopicImpact: Improving Customer Feedback Analysis with Opinion Units for Topic Modeling and Star-Rating Prediction [0.29021840487584505]
  We improve the extraction of insights from customer reviews by restructuring the topic modelling pipeline to operate on opinion units.<n>The result is a heightened performance of the subsequent topic modeling, leading to coherent and interpretable topics.<n>By correlating the topics and sentiments with business metrics, such as star ratings, we can gain insights on how specific customer concerns impact business outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-16T09:19:26Z)
• Eradicating Social Biases in Sentiment Analysis using Semantic Blinding and Semantic Propagation Graph Neural Networks [0.0]
  The SProp GNN relies exclusively on syntactic structures and word-level emotional cues to predict emotions in text.<n>By semantically blinding the model to information about specific words, it is robust to social biases such as political or gender bias.<n>The SProp GNN shows performance superior to lexicon-based alternatives on two different prediction tasks, and across two languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-19T13:23:53Z)
• Achieving Fairness in Predictive Process Analytics via Adversarial Learning [50.31323204077591]
  This paper addresses the challenge of integrating a debiasing phase into predictive business process analytics. Our framework leverages on adversial debiasing is evaluated on four case studies, showing a significant reduction in the contribution of biased variables to the predicted value.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-03T15:56:03Z)
• Identifying and Mitigating Social Bias Knowledge in Language Models [52.52955281662332]
  We propose a novel debiasing approach, Fairness Stamp (FAST), which enables fine-grained calibration of individual social biases.<n>FAST surpasses state-of-the-art baselines with superior debiasing performance.<n>This highlights the potential of fine-grained debiasing strategies to achieve fairness in large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-07T17:14:58Z)
• The Quest for the Right Mediator: Surveying Mechanistic Interpretability Through the Lens of Causal Mediation Analysis [51.046457649151336]
  We propose a perspective on interpretability research grounded in causal mediation analysis.<n>We describe the history and current state of interpretability taxonomized according to the types of causal units (mediators) employed.<n>We discuss the pros and cons of each mediator, providing insights as to when particular kinds of mediators and search methods are most appropriate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-02T17:51:42Z)
• Counterfactuals of Counterfactuals: a back-translation-inspired approach to analyse counterfactual editors [3.4253416336476246]
  We focus on the analysis of counterfactual, contrastive explanations. We propose a new back translation-inspired evaluation methodology. We show that by iteratively feeding the counterfactual to the explainer we can obtain valuable insights into the behaviour of both the predictor and the explainer models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-26T16:04:28Z)
• Counterfactual Reasoning for Out-of-distribution Multimodal Sentiment Analysis [56.84237932819403]
  This paper aims to estimate and mitigate the bad effect of textual modality for strong OOD generalization. Inspired by this, we devise a model-agnostic counterfactual framework for multimodal sentiment analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-24T03:57:40Z)
• Explainability in Process Outcome Prediction: Guidelines to Obtain Interpretable and Faithful Models [77.34726150561087]
  We define explainability through the interpretability of the explanations and the faithfulness of the explainability model in the field of process outcome prediction. This paper contributes a set of guidelines named X-MOP which allows selecting the appropriate model based on the event log specifications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-30T05:59:50Z)
• Did the Cat Drink the Coffee? Challenging Transformers with Generalized Event Knowledge [59.22170796793179]
  Transformers Language Models (TLMs) were tested on a benchmark for the textitdynamic estimation of thematic fit Our results show that TLMs can reach performances that are comparable to those achieved by SDM. However, additional analysis consistently suggests that TLMs do not capture important aspects of event knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-22T20:52:26Z)
• Do not explain without context: addressing the blind spot of model explanations [2.280298858971133]
  This paper highlights a blind spot which is often overlooked when monitoring and auditing machine learning models. We discuss that many model explanations depend directly or indirectly on the choice of the referenced data distribution. We showcase examples where small changes in the distribution lead to drastic changes in the explanations, such as a change in trend or, alarmingly, a conclusion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-28T12:48:40Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.