An es$ay about Economics of financial markets.

ECON7200 – Semester 2, 2023

Essay Deadline: Tuesday 19 September 2023 16:00 (Brisbane time)

Write an essay between 800 and 1200 words (excluding references), consisting of three tasks:

1. Read and summarize the following article:

• Malkiel, B. G. (2012). The Efficient-Market Hypothesis and the Financial Crisis. In A. S. Blinder, A. W. Loh, and R. M. Solow (Eds.), Rethinking the Financial Crisis, Russell Sage Foundation, New York.

2. Explain the efficient market hypothesis (EMH), behavioural finance, and their relevance in explaining asset price bubbles.

3. In the end of the article, Malkiel concluded that“EMH and behavioural finance should not be considered as competitive models”.

Discuss how he reached this view, and provide your view on this statement.

General Guideline: The essay should start with the introduction, main body and the conclusion. Make sure that in your essay, all the three tasks are carried out.

Criteria and Marking:

The total mark for this assignment is 30, which consists of the following criteria:

• Article summary (4 marks) • EMH and behavioural finance (6 marks) • Discuss the author’s view and your view

(10 marks)

• Writing Quality (5 marks) • Presentation (1 mark) • Reference (4 marks)

In the Writing Quality criterion, your writing style, essay flow and grammar/spelling will be examined. The Presentation criterion includes various details such as document format, identification and compliance of word limit. In addition, there are some general points to consider:

• Your essay must have a cover page detailing your ID and word count. • Remember to give a total word count (excluding references) on the cover page. • You cannot use any bullet points in the summary. • Any reference style is allowed, but it must be consistent (i.e. same style throughout the essay). • Please check you citation’s accuracy, even if it’s pre-filled from Google Scholar or UQ Library. • You cannot cite Wikipedia or Investopedia. • If graphs/figures are used, remember to quote the source. • Use academic writing style and not creative writing style. • Do not plagiarize! It will be dealt with very seriously in UQ and is simply not worth trying.

Submission:

Each student should submit a Word or PDF file through the Turnitin link on the Blackboard course website. Submission through email will not be accepted. All submissions will be run through the Turnitin anti-plagiarism software.

ECON7200 Essay Marking Rubric – Semester 2, 2023 (Marks for each part are given in parentheses, 30 marks in total) Criteria 4 3 2 1 0 Task 1 - Summary (4) Clear and precise

summary, with all main points of the article mentioned and explained

Good summary, though one main point is missing, or poorly explained

Adequate summary, though more than one main points are missing, or poorly explained

The summary is incoherent and/or irrelevant. Some main points are missing, or poorly explained

No summary given

Task 2 (6) - Definition (2) A clear definition of

both EMH and behavioural finance are given

A definition of one concept is not given, or poorly explained

No definition given

- EMH and asset price bubble (2)

Clear explanation to show how EMH can be used to explain asset price bubble, with good use of research to reflect the arguments.

Satisfactory explanation, though some arguments can be weak, or not supported by evidence.

No attempt shown

- Behavioural finance and asset price bubble (2)

Clear explanation to show how behavioural finance can be used to explain asset price bubble, with good use of research.

Satisfactory explanation, though some arguments can be weak, or not supported by evidence.

No attempt shown

Criteria 4 3 2 1 0 Task 3 (10) - Discussing the author’s statement (4)

Very clear and insightful discussion. The arguments are valid, and both sides of the argument are given, and discussed in detail

Good discussion, though some arguments are flawed. Both sides of the argument are given and discussed

Flawed discussion overall, with some irrelevant arguments. Both sides of the argument are mentioned

Very flawed discussion, and not all sides of the argument are discussed

No attempt shown

- Student’s conclusion (2) The conclusion is clear, and is relevant to the discussion above

The conclusion is not very clear, or not very related to the discussion above

No, unclear, or irrelevant conclusion given

- Evidence/application of research (4)

Excellent evidence of research, with arguments supported by highly suitable and relevant sources

Good evidence of research, with most arguments supported by suitable and relevant sources

Flawed evidence of research, with some arguments not supported by suitable and relevant sources

Some key arguments are not supported by relevant sources, reflecting a lack of depth in reading and/or choice of suitable sources

No, or very inconsequential evidence of further research

Criteria 4 3 2 1 0 Writing quality (5) - Essay format (1) Clear, and relevant

introduction and conclusion

No, or irrelevant introduction or conclusion given

- Writing style (1) Academic writing style is used, with a good flow between paragraphs, sections, or discussion points

Academic writing style is not used, or there is no essay flow between paragraphs, sections, or discussion points

- Grammar/Structural clarity (3)

Both grammar and spelling are faultless throughout the essay

There are occasional grammatical and/or spelling errors but these do not affect readability of the essay

Spelling and/or grammar is consistently incorrect, hindering the report's ‘flow’ and readability.

The grammar and spelling are too poor to make sense of most of the essay

Presentation (1) The essay has a cover page, detailing name, student ID, and word count

Not all details are given, or the word limit is not followed

Criteria 4 3 2 1 0 Reference (4) - Reference style (2) Reference style,

including reference list and in-text citations, is consistent, and the reference list is alphabetically ordered

Reference style, including reference list and in-text citations, is mostly consistent with some errors, or the reference list is alphabetically ordered

Inconsistent, or incorrect reference style Important note: even if students use the reference tools from database such as UQ Library or Google Scholar, please double check them as they might be incorrect

- Reference quality (2) Quality academic and/or news sources are chosen, which greatly support the arguments

Flawed/missing reference list and/or irrelevant/missing in-text citations

Inconsequential, or no reference given