Nicholas Mangee is Professor of Finance and Faculty Fellow of Scholar and Student Success in the Parker College of Business at Georgia Southern University. He is also a research associate for the Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET) program on Knightian Uncertainty Economics (KUE) for financial markets. Mangee has written a scholarly book, titled How Novelty and Narratives Drive the Stock Market: Black Swans, Animal Spirits and Scapegoats (Cambridge University Press, 2021). He has delivered invited lectures on his book for industry symposia in London and New York City. He is published in the Journal of Behavioral Finance, the Journal of Risk and Financial Management, Journal of Economics and Finance, the SURE Journal, the Economics Journal, the Journal of Economic Methodology, and Economics Bulletin. His research focuses on testing the implications of macro-finance models based on KUE by investigating the relative roles and dynamics between historically novel events, market fundamentals, psychology, and social context in explaining instability in stock price fluctuations. In 2023, he received the J. Daniel Speight Research Award. In 2021, he received the M. Albert Burke Banking Endowment Research Award. In 2017, Mangee received the Outstanding Faculty Award. He earned his doctoral degree at the University of New Hampshire. He has also contributed over 50 columns on current economic and financial events to the Savannah Morning News city paper.
Nicholas Mangee
By this expert
Expectations Concordance and Stock Market Volatility: Knightian Uncertainty in the Year of the Pandemic
Stock-Price Volatility During the Pandemic
How Market Sentiment Underpins Knightian Uncertainty
We find empirical evidence that changes in market sentiment drive unforeseeable change in how stock returns unfold over time, thereby engendering Knightian uncertainty.
How Market Sentiment Drives Forecasts of Stock Returns
We reveal a novel channel through which market participants’ sentiment influences how they forecast stock returns: their optimism (pessimism) affects the weights they assign to fundamentals.
New Evidence for the Present-Value Model of Stock Prices: Why the REH Version Failed Empirically
Shiller (1981) and others have shown that the quantitative predictions of the REH present-value model are inconsistent with time-series data on stock prices and dividends. In this paper, we assess the empirical relevance of the model without explicitly representing how a rational market participant forecasts dividends and interest rates.