As previously noted, there were various versions of the surveys floating around, and so some questions numbers were based on old versions of the survey. This has been noted in correspondence between the authors and the FPA, I believe.

This restatement of research question includes the survey question numbers that correspond to the survey data, as well as decisions made on controls/financial incentive.

This document summarizes the predictor variable elimination process. Briefly, regression vaiables selected for inclusion via forward/Efroymson and Exhaustive stepwise regression. The modified forward (Efroymonson) and exhaustive set techniques yielded the same results. Variable not noted as YES are to be excluded. The included variables from all predictors on each response sub-stantially matches those included when each class of predictor variables was considered separately.

Since the predictors had little internal colinearity, we see that exclusion is most likely the result of not contrinuting to the least squares solution. The complete list of excluded variables and discussion is on the spreadsheet and notes document below.

The source spreadsheet is available here (.XLS)
The source document is available here (.DOC)

Inclusion of Q25 and Q26 makes a difference.

Here is an introductory writeup of the significant findings.

See the comparative chart showing the "Deltas" on regression coefficients/predictors as a result of including the new variables, and what dropped out, and what changed on Q11c and Q20c (Q8 and Q17 remained the same).

CAVEAT: I have not updated the Research Question Restatement to incorporate these new variables. Note that the Likert Scale [1 Agree - Disagree 5] on Q25 puts high values on LOW DEGREES of regulation. On Q26, a high value indicates a QUICKLY CHANGING regulatory environment, so interpret weights accordingly.

The source spreadsheets are available here (.XLS)

All of the Likert response variables are ordered in least to most favorable, so we know the sign of these correlations. The coding on the YES/NO answers seem to be 1=YES, 2=NO, so these would indicated correlation of the opposite sign. The Likert scales are indicated on the restated survey questions.

The source spreadsheets are available here (.XLS)

Here're some linguistic statistics for you. One wonders about the distribution of names of stocks. We have a smaple of names of stocks from a big institutional portfolio to compare against our 221 respondents, and also the distribution of a sample of English surnames.

Differences between the institutional portfolio and our respondents could be attributable to (a) Large cap more politically active; (b) research bias in selecting companies for survey; or (c) some characteristic of companies which chose to complete or return the survey. (a) as a factor is ruled out since institutional portfolio generally collects stocks in our respondents' capitalization range. So (b) or (c) are the more likely explanations, with (c) being a probable candidate.