根据Pike等人(1993)的研究，英国投资者的相对短期行为似乎是这样的:在过去的十年中，公司联系人作为分析师的关键基本信息源的重要性发生了转变(Shank 2001)。因此，这项研究否定了英国分析师的结论，即把更多的注意力放在短期目标导向上。如果利益相关者不足或他们不能够理解数据显著的长期公司性能如管道相关技术的进步,那么这个描述,他们将过度应对目前的利润,宣布股息,每股收益,和某些相关财务数据依赖性能历史或其他措施的性能在短期内(Liljebolom等2010)。因此，有人认为，通过分析师以及基金经理的这种金融短期关注，将在基于股票的价格中产生相应的短期偏差。资本市场只有有限的组织前景数据。具体来说，一般级别的投资分析师和基金经理没有足够的知识和基于技术的专门知识来评估整个管道中的技术。英国电子工业的一个特别突出的技术能力丧失的例子是，即使在该工业的研究密集之后，在电子工业的25名分析师中也只有8名具有基本的科学资格。从这个角度来看，制药业是非常幸运的。穆迪发现，11名化学分析师中有9名是理科毕业生(BIS 2012)。禁止与内部人士打交道的规定，在本质上也对价格敏感数据起到了抑制作用，这些数据可能不会提供给某个股东，但也不会提供给所有人。
股息变动对股票定价的影响在这里也很重要。在其他条件相同的情况下，增加股利会降低公司股票的预期收益。任何低于降低股价(一对一)以提高股息的做法，都将包括股东产生的短期主义，并对管理层施加短期压力。Litzenberger等人(1984)的经验证据表明，股利的增加确实会导致公司股票预期收益的降低，而Miller等人(1982)则认为不会。金融研究中普遍同意的观点是，对个人而言，股息较高的支出与投资目的无关。然而，与此同时，人们也普遍认为，市场上的需求提供了稳定的未来股息增长率，而那些不能提供相同股息增长率的人将受到惩罚(Demirag et al . 1996)。考虑到目前英国的税收结构提供了一个主要的税收激励，有利于股息的支付而不是利润的保留，通过英国组织支付相对较高的股息水平可能是低水平投资的突出原因之一。这是因为与股息相关的税收抵免，使得股息收入比机构股东的免税资本利得(包括作为养老金的资金)更具吸引力。此外，如果股价对股息的反应是积极的，那么当一家公司渴望持有或减少股息时，它可能会受到提高或持有股息的诱惑。
According to Pike et al, (1993), the relative short term behaviours of UK investors seems to be such that it shifts in the significance of company contacts as the key essential information source for analysts in the previous decade (Shank 2001). This study consequently, rejected UK analyst’s conclusion of placing higher focus over short term goals orientation. If stakeholders are inadequate or they are not able to understand data significant to long term companies performance such as pipeline related technological progress, then this depicts that they will excessively respond to present profit, announcements of dividend, earnings on each share, and certain related financial data dependent upon performance historically or other measures of performance in the short term (Liljebolom et al 2010). Therefore, it is argued that such financial short term focus through analysts as well as funding managers will create a corresponding biasness in the short term within stock based prices. Capitalized markets only can have a limited data on organizational prospects. Specifically, analysts for investment and fund managers at general level do not have enough knowledge and technology based expertise needed for evaluating technology across the pipeline. An especially striking case of incapacity of technology was illustrated for British electronics industry wherein only 8 out of 25 analysts in electronics had an essential qualification of science even after the research intensity in the industry. From this perspective, pharmaceuticals were fortunate exceptionally. It was found by Moody that 9 out of 11 chemical analysts were graduates of science (BIS 2012). The rules against dealing with insiders are also inhibitory in nature with price sensitive data that might not be given to one shareholder when not been given to everyone.
The influence of dividend changes over share pricing is also essential here. Considering other things as equal, increasing the dividend should decrease the company shares expected return. Anything lesser than share price reduction (one for one) for increasing dividend would be inclusive of short termism to generate on the part of the shareholder and impose pressure of short term over managers. Empirical evidence illustrated through Litzenberger et al (1984), depicted that rise in dividends does result in reducing the company share expected return while Miller et al (1982) have argued that they do not. The generally agreed-upon perspective within financial studies is that pay-outs with higher dividends are not relevant for an individual with regard to purposes of investment. At the same time, however, it is also accepted generally that the demands in the market offer steady future dividends growth rate and punishment is given to those who are not able to provide the same (Demirag et al 1996). Considering that present Britain tax structure provides a major incentive of tax in favour of dividend pay-out instead of profit retention, the relatively high dividend level payments through UK organizations might be one of the prominent reasons for investment of low levels. This is due to the tax credits related with dividends that make income of dividend highly attractive than tax exempt capital gains in institutional shareholders inclusive of funds given as pension. If the share price, moreover responds in a positive way to the dividends, a firm might get tempted for raising or holding the dividend when aspiring at holding or reducing it.