### Table 1. Dependent Variables and Regressors

1998

"... In PAGE 2: ..................................................................... 25 Tables Table1 . Dependent Variables and Regressors Table 2.... In PAGE 10: ... The analysis presented here is based on traders that could be located in the two rounds.3 The main characteristics of the surveyed traders are summarized in Table1 . Total sales and gross margin are used as alternative measures of output.... In PAGE 13: ... Section 3. Returns to Social Network Capital The estimation of equation (1) by ordinary least squares is presented in the first column of Tables 3 and 4 using the dependent variables presented in Table1 . The func- tional form used for regression analysis is basically a Cobb-Douglas production function and is estimated in log-log form, i.... ..."

### Table 2: Models with an endogenous regressor.

### TABLE 9 Projected Values of Regressors

### Table 2. Regressor Descriptive Statistics

"... In PAGE 19: ...Felix Landsiedl 19 B. Descriptive Statistics Table2 gives summary descriptive statistics for the dataset resulting from the collection, ordering and filtering procedure described above. After the filtering and data cleaning process described above, we end up with 7,766 intraday realized transaction bid- ask and 31,714 equally-weighted, daily, quoted bid-ask spread observations.... In PAGE 21: ... As expected the DHC are significantly positive in all regression specifications and for both samples. We can infer from the correlations depicted in Table2 that log(DHC+1) are more than 50% larger for the realized spread, as the realized DHC incorporates the total contract volume of each trade whereas the DHC for the quoted spread assumes a transaction volume of 1. Therefore, the estimated parameter for the DHC impact is larger for the QSPR estimation than for the RSPR estimation.... In PAGE 22: ... In the realized spread estimation it has a positive sign but it lacks statistical significance. Looking at the descriptive statistics of Table2 we can see that the average gamma of all quoted spread observations is 0.14 with a standard deviation of 0.... ..."

### Table 3. Regressor Ccorrelation Matrix

"... In PAGE 19: ... This points out that the QSPR sample contains options that are weakly covered by the market makers. Table3 shows the cross-correlations of the independent and the explanatory variables used in the regression equations (14) and (15). The first line reports the correlation for the transaction sample containing 7766 observations and the second line refers to the quoted spread option sample with 31726 observations.... ..."

### Table 7. The stationary probability.

2000

Cited by 3

### Table 2. Stationary FAM

2000

### Table 2 Correlation Matrix of Basic Regressors

"... In PAGE 21: ... The latter variables, however, are available only for a smaller sample. The correlation matrix of our basic set of regressors in Table2 shows three striking features. First, as mentioned above, all three income distribution indicators are very highly correlated with each other, with correlation coefficients in all cases exceeding .... In PAGE 22: ... For both the full and LDC samples in columns 8 and 9, the main consequence is that the estimated coefficient on growth loses all significance, a finding similar to that reported by Carroll and Weil (1994) when excluding from their sample the East-Asian apos;tigers apos;. In addition, in the LDC sample (column 9) the estimated coefficient on the income distribution indicator becomes larger in absolute value and closer to statistical significance, Is The correlation between real per capita GNP and its square, not presented in Table2... ..."

### Table 6: The importance of the regressors in terms of variance

### Table 2. Selecting regressors for modelling faith

2006

"... In PAGE 50: ... Based on the results above I choose regression 8 as the model to prefer even though BIC points out regression 9 as a more parsimonious model. Table2 shows no variable that is robust significant. There are two variables that are close to be robust significant are donation and riskbehavior.... In PAGE 63: ... Table2 . Correlation matrix Age Confidence Donation Excitement- Friendliness Gamble Male Other trust Past trust Riskbehavior Risk-taking Self-reported Siblings Trust strangers Confidence index 0,414 index seeking index trustworthiness Donation 0,113 -0,004 Excitement-seeking -0,055 0,015 0,093 Friendliness -0,067 -0,080 0,209 0,504 Gamble -0,058 0,067 0,021 0,200 0,108 Male 0,003 0,246 -0,004 -0,061 -0,326 0,197 Other trust index -0,004 -0,365 -0,293 -0,009 -0,072 -0,060 0,041 Past trust -0,307 0,033 0,093 0,400 0,103 0,151 0,197 -0,241 Riskbehavior 0,134 0,153 0,107 0,394 0,232 0,028 -0,118 0,159 0,107 Risk-taking -0,011 0,180 0,231 0,644 0,120 0,318 0,175 -0,117 0,319 0,146 Self-reported trustworthines 0,110 -0,159 0,226 -0,083 0,182 -0,171 -0,008 -0,027 -0,125 -0,131 -0,142 Siblings -0,159 0,014 0,078 -0,108 0,014 -0,138 0,063 0,064 0,042 -0,167 0,044 0,129 Trust strangers 0,000 -0,347 0,008 -0,017 -0,082 -0,373 -0,021 0,343 -0,183 0,210 -0,292 0,085 0,158 Trust index 0,163 -0,219 -0,085 0,001 0,030 -0,247 -0,065 0,621 -0,198 0,152 -0,293 0,011 0,131 0,471 ... ..."