{
 "validation_errors": [],
 "repairs": [
  "dropped figures.convention_notes_absent"
 ],
 "doc_id": "jof_12685",
 "ontology_version": "1.0",
 "prompt_version": "1.0",
 "model": "claude-opus-5-5",
 "effort": "medium",
 "annotated_at": "2026-11-03T23:26:28+00:00",
 "source_sha256": "334f7d010f7f5af26c2405d2d81140f1c08a24989b39e6015f3a6937a71b35c5",
 "parser": "pymupdf-jof-heuristics-1.3",
 "payload_chars": 25219,
 "usage": {
  "input": 8311,
  "output": 2007,
  "cache_read": 0,
  "cache_write": 3968
 },
 "cost_usd": 0.093224,
 "request_id": "req_011CggrofhQR8XspmamsZo1N",
 "annotation": {
  "genre": "empirical",
  "subfield": "behavioral_finance",
  "subfield_secondary": "asset_pricing",
  "primary_method": "reduced_form_regression",
  "identification": {
   "estimand": "Effect of the previous trading day's salient (large-firm value-weighted) earnings surprise on the return reaction to a firm's own earnings announcement, holding its own surprise constant",
   "strategy": "Regressions of announcement returns on prior-day salient surprise, exploiting earnings dates scheduled weeks in advance as quasi-exogenous ordering; timing tests, unconditional return predictability, reversals and a trading strategy rule out information transmission",
   "key_assumptions": [
    "Announcement dates are set in advance and are uncorrelated with the fundamentals of the firm relative to prior-day surprises",
    "Prior-day surprises do not carry information relevant to the next-day announcer that rational markets would price",
    "Absence of strategic timing of announcements"
   ],
   "threats_addressed": [
    "information transmission from earlier announcements",
    "expectational errors versus perceptual errors",
    "risk changes, trading frictions and capital constraints",
    "strategic timing of earnings announcements",
    "bias or staleness of analyst forecasts"
   ],
   "causal_language_strength": 4,
   "uses_causal_claim": true
  },
  "abstract_moves": {
   "question": {
    "present": true,
    "sentence_index": 0
   },
   "gap": {
    "present": true,
    "sentence_index": 1
   },
   "method": {
    "present": true,
    "sentence_index": 3
   },
   "results": {
    "present": true,
    "sentence_index": 2
   },
   "magnitude": {
    "present": false,
    "sentence_index": -1
   },
   "contribution": {
    "present": true,
    "sentence_index": 1
   }
  },
  "introduction": {
   "moves": [
    {
     "paragraph_index": 0,
     "move": "other"
    },
    {
     "paragraph_index": 7,
     "move": "motivation"
    },
    {
     "paragraph_index": 8,
     "move": "mechanism_or_theory_sketch"
    },
    {
     "paragraph_index": 9,
     "move": "preview_of_results"
    },
    {
     "paragraph_index": 10,
     "move": "preview_of_results"
    },
    {
     "paragraph_index": 11,
     "move": "identification_defense"
    },
    {
     "paragraph_index": 12,
     "move": "preview_of_results"
    },
    {
     "paragraph_index": 13,
     "move": "contribution_statement"
    },
    {
     "paragraph_index": 13,
     "move": "related_literature_positioning"
    }
   ],
   "contribution_paragraph_index": 13,
   "contribution_types": [
    "new_evidence"
   ],
   "roadmap_present": false,
   "literature_positioning_location": "inside_introduction"
  },
  "section_roles": [
   {
    "idx": 0,
    "role": "introduction"
   },
   {
    "idx": 1,
    "role": "data"
   },
   {
    "idx": 2,
    "role": "results"
   },
   {
    "idx": 3,
    "role": "robustness"
   },
   {
    "idx": 4,
    "role": "robustness"
   },
   {
    "idx": 5,
    "role": "results"
   },
   {
    "idx": 6,
    "role": "conclusion"
   }
  ],
  "results_presentation": {
   "economic_significance_discussed": true,
   "statistical_significance_language": "stars_and_tstats",
   "magnitude_statements_in_intro": true
  },
  "robustness": {
   "location": "main_text_section",
   "types": [
    "alternative_measure",
    "subsample",
    "alternative_specification",
    "falsification",
    "placebo"
   ]
  },
  "tables": {
   "convention_notes": "Regression tables report standard errors in parentheses, clustered by date, with stars marking 10/5/1% significance. Notes define variable construction and return windows and refer back to Table II for definitions.",
   "units_stated_in_notes": true,
   "standard_errors_description": "clustered"
  },
  "figures": {
   "uncertainty_shown": "unclear"
  },
  "conclusion": {
   "bounded_claims": true,
   "policy_implications": true,
   "open_questions": true,
   "restates_contribution": true
  },
  "hedging": {
   "level": "moderate",
   "typical_devices": [
    "consistent with",
    "suggestive evidence",
    "potentially",
    "likely",
    "we leave for future work"
   ]
  },
  "claim_evidence": [
   {
    "claim": "Return reaction to today's announcement falls as the prior-day salient surprise rises, controlling for own surprise",
    "evidence_type": "figure",
    "evidence_ref": "Figure 1; Table II"
   },
   {
    "claim": "The effect is a level shift rather than an interaction with own surprise",
    "evidence_type": "table",
    "evidence_ref": "Table III; Figure 3"
   },
   {
    "claim": "Distortions reverse over roughly 50 trading days",
    "evidence_type": "table",
    "evidence_ref": "Table IV"
   },
   {
    "claim": "Long-short strategy on prior-day surprise earns about 15% per year among large firms",
    "evidence_type": "table",
    "evidence_ref": "Table V; Figure 4"
   },
   {
    "claim": "Prior-day surprise does not predict next-day announcer surprises, against information transmission",
    "evidence_type": "table",
    "evidence_ref": "Table VI"
   },
   {
    "claim": "Results are not driven by risk, trading frictions or strategic timing",
    "evidence_type": "table",
    "evidence_ref": "Tables VII, VIII"
   },
   {
    "claim": "Effect is concentrated at t-1 and holds within the day; heterogeneity exists by size and industry",
    "evidence_type": "table",
    "evidence_ref": "Tables X, XI, XII"
   }
  ],
  "structural_summary": "Opens with a classical epigraph and lab or popular examples of contrast effects, then sketches the prediction for earnings announcements. It previews the main figure and its magnitude and defends against information-transmission explanations through timing, reversals and a trading strategy. Supplementary timing and heterogeneity results follow, then contributions positioned against limited-attention and expectational-error literatures. The body proceeds through data, baseline results, a long section on alternative explanations, robustness, further exploration and a conclusion with broader implications.",
  "writing_profile_keywords": [
   "behavioral bias in markets",
   "lab-to-field",
   "alternative explanations section",
   "trading strategy",
   "earnings announcements",
   "epigraph opening"
  ],
  "confidence": 0.8,
  "notes": "Introduction paragraphs 0-6 are fragments of the epigraph and are treated as a single 'other' move. Paragraph 7 is truncated. No explicit roadmap is visible in the excerpts."
 },
 "deterministic_checks": {
  "roadmap_regex": false,
  "contribution_regex_in_intro": true,
  "magnitude_in_abstract": false,
  "abstract_n_sentences": 5,
  "intro_n_paragraphs": 14,
  "intro_n_words": 1315,
  "causal_words_in_abstract": 0,
  "hedge_words_in_abstract": 0,
  "stars_mentioned": true,
  "clustered_se_mentioned": true,
  "internet_appendix_mentioned": false,
  "section_roles_rule": {
   "0": "introduction",
   "1": "data",
   "2": "results",
   "3": "robustness",
   "4": "robustness",
   "5": "other",
   "6": "conclusion"
  }
 },
 "schema_valid": true,
 "code_version": "87c73cd-dirty"
}