1{2 "validation_errors": [],3 "doc_id": "jof_12768",4 "ontology_version": "1.0",5 "prompt_version": "1.0",6 "model": "claude-opus-5-5",7 "effort": "medium",8 "annotated_at": "2026-11-03T23:08:30+00:00",9 "source_sha256": "1d24c8f974b29cb6f2b1d51ef4a7478f16e44a772cee214e4bc82339b053cc3b",10 "parser": "pymupdf-jof-heuristics-1.3",11 "payload_chars": 21201,12 "usage": {13 "input": 6629,14 "output": 1881,15 "cache_read": 3968,16 "cache_write": 017 },18 "cost_usd": 0.06493,19 "request_id": "req_011CggqSHKnsFwpsf8BVeY35",20 "annotation": {21 "genre": "empirical",22 "subfield": "asset_pricing",23 "subfield_secondary": "market_microstructure; experimental finance",24 "primary_method": "survey_or_experiment",25 "identification": {26 "estimand": "Treatment effects of exogenous information-network structure (none, complete, circle, core-periphery) on signal acquisition, volume, liquidity, information aggregation, price informativeness and profits",27 "strategy": "Between-session laboratory treatments that randomly vary the information network, analyzed with ordered probit and OLS regressions on treatment dummies, using standard errors clustered at subject level",28 "key_assumptions": [29 "Network structure is exogenous and assigned by design",30 "Information sharing is automatic, perfect and nonstrategic",31 "Subjects in different sessions are comparable"32 ],33 "threats_addressed": [34 "Endogenous network formation (removed by imposing exogenous networks)",35 "Within-subject dependence (handled by clustering)"36 ],37 "causal_language_strength": 4,38 "uses_causal_claim": true39 },40 "abstract_moves": {41 "question": {42 "present": true,43 "sentence_index": 044 },45 "gap": {46 "present": false,47 "sentence_index": -148 },49 "method": {50 "present": true,51 "sentence_index": 052 },53 "results": {54 "present": true,55 "sentence_index": 156 },57 "magnitude": {58 "present": false,59 "sentence_index": -160 },61 "contribution": {62 "present": false,63 "sentence_index": -164 }65 },66 "introduction": {67 "moves": [68 {69 "paragraph_index": 0,70 "move": "motivation"71 },72 {73 "paragraph_index": 0,74 "move": "literature_gap"75 },76 {77 "paragraph_index": 1,78 "move": "preview_of_approach"79 },80 {81 "paragraph_index": 2,82 "move": "mechanism_or_theory_sketch"83 },84 {85 "paragraph_index": 2,86 "move": "preview_of_results"87 },88 {89 "paragraph_index": 3,90 "move": "preview_of_results"91 },92 {93 "paragraph_index": 4,94 "move": "preview_of_results"95 },96 {97 "paragraph_index": 4,98 "move": "tension_or_puzzle"99 },100 {101 "paragraph_index": 4,102 "move": "related_literature_positioning"103 }104 ],105 "contribution_paragraph_index": 1,106 "contribution_types": [107 "new_evidence"108 ],109 "roadmap_present": false,110 "literature_positioning_location": "inside_introduction"111 },112 "section_roles": [113 {114 "idx": 0,115 "role": "introduction"116 },117 {118 "idx": 1,119 "role": "empirical_design"120 },121 {122 "idx": 2,123 "role": "results"124 },125 {126 "idx": 3,127 "role": "other"128 },129 {130 "idx": 4,131 "role": "conclusion"132 }133 ],134 "results_presentation": {135 "economic_significance_discussed": true,136 "statistical_significance_language": "stars_and_tstats",137 "magnitude_statements_in_intro": true138 },139 "robustness": {140 "location": "none_seen",141 "types": []142 },143 "tables": {144 "convention_notes": "Tables pair period-average descriptive statistics, reported with standard deviations, with regression tables. The regressions use treatment dummies against a nonnetworked baseline and include a period control. Standard errors are clustered by subject and reported in parentheses, with stars marking significance. Notes define each dependent variable precisely.",145 "units_stated_in_notes": true,146 "standard_errors_description": "clustered"147 },148 "figures": {149 "uncertainty_shown": "mixed"150 },151 "conclusion": {152 "bounded_claims": true,153 "policy_implications": false,154 "open_questions": true,155 "restates_contribution": true156 },157 "hedging": {158 "level": "moderate",159 "typical_devices": [160 "on average",161 "typically",162 "explicit design simplifications acknowledged",163 "might not be as strong"164 ]165 },166 "claim_evidence": [167 {168 "claim": "Signal acquisition probability and quantity fall as a trader's number of network connections rises.",169 "evidence_type": "table",170 "evidence_ref": "Tables II, III, IV; Figure 2"171 },172 {173 "claim": "Information sharing raises trading volume and improves liquidity.",174 "evidence_type": "table",175 "evidence_ref": "Table V"176 },177 {178 "claim": "Prices aggregate more of the available information with sharing, and aggregation rises with network density.",179 "evidence_type": "table",180 "evidence_ref": "Table VI; Figures 3-4"181 },182 {183 "claim": "Price informativeness about the true state does not improve with social communication.",184 "evidence_type": "table",185 "evidence_ref": "Table IX; Figures 5-6"186 },187 {188 "claim": "Net earnings are higher under sharing because of savings on signal costs.",189 "evidence_type": "table",190 "evidence_ref": "Tables X, XIII"191 },192 {193 "claim": "Prices support semi-strong but not strong-form efficiency.",194 "evidence_type": "prior_literature",195 "evidence_ref": "Discussion; Page and Siemroth (2018)"196 }197 ],198 "structural_summary": "The introduction opens with the rational-expectations literature on costly information and flags the absence of social networks as an open question. It then describes the exogenous-network setup and frames a trade-off between richer information sets and free-riding. Results are previewed sequentially: crowding out of acquisition, then liquidity, aggregation, informativeness and earnings, with a counter-to-conventional-wisdom point on forecasting quality. A design section presents the lab procedures and the four network treatments. A long results section is organized by outcome, using regressions on treatment dummies. A discussion section links the findings to market efficiency, and a short conclusion restates the findings and lists extensions.",199 "writing_profile_keywords": [200 "laboratory experiment",201 "information networks",202 "free-riding",203 "treatment comparisons",204 "price efficiency",205 "outcome-by-outcome results"206 ],207 "confidence": 0.82,208 "notes": "Experimental asset-market paper with no equations shown. No explicit robustness section is visible in the excerpts. An Internet Appendix exists, but its contents are not shown."209 },210 "deterministic_checks": {211 "roadmap_regex": false,212 "contribution_regex_in_intro": false,213 "magnitude_in_abstract": false,214 "abstract_n_sentences": 4,215 "intro_n_paragraphs": 5,216 "intro_n_words": 792,217 "causal_words_in_abstract": 0,218 "hedge_words_in_abstract": 0,219 "stars_mentioned": false,220 "clustered_se_mentioned": true,221 "internet_appendix_mentioned": false,222 "section_roles_rule": {223 "0": "introduction",224 "1": "other",225 "2": "results",226 "3": "conclusion",227 "4": "conclusion"228 }229 },230 "schema_valid": true,231 "code_version": "87c73cd-dirty"232}