@book{Bernecker2014,
  author    = {Bernecker, Andreas},
  title     = {Essays in Empirical Political Economics},
  pages     = {XI, 174 S. : Ill., graph. Darst.},
  year      = {2014},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SchneiderTran2015,
  author    = {Schneider, Felix and Tran, Duc Hung},
  title     = {On the relation between the fair value option and bid-ask spreads: descriptive evidence on the recognition of credit risk changes under IFRS},
  series = {Journal of Business Economics},
  volume    = {85},
  journal   = {Journal of Business Economics},
  number    = {9},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Berlin},
  issn      = {1861-8928},
  doi       = {10.1007/s11573-015-0776-2},
  pages     = {1049 -- 1081},
  year      = {2015},
  language  = {en}
}
@incollection{KrollLudwigs2015,
  author    = {Kroll-Ludwigs, Kathrin},
  title     = {Art. 5 Rom III-Regulation (choice of applicable law by the parties)},
  series = {Rome Regulations : commentary},
  booktitle = {Rome Regulations : commentary},
  editor    = {Calliess, Gralf-Peter},
  edition   = {2nd ed.},
  publisher = {Wolters Kluwer},
  isbn      = {9789041147547},
  year      = {2015},
  language  = {en}
}
@incollection{KrollLudwigs2015,
  author    = {Kroll-Ludwigs, Kathrin},
  title     = {Art. 7 Rome III-Regulation (formal validity)},
  series = {Rome Regulations : commentary},
  booktitle = {Rome Regulations : commentary},
  editor    = {Colliess, Gralf-Peter},
  edition   = {2nd ed.},
  publisher = {Wolters Kluwer},
  isbn      = {9789041147547},
  year      = {2015},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KlettkeHomburgGell2015,
  author    = {Klettke, Tanja and Homburg, Carsten and Gell, Sebastian},
  title     = {How to measure analyst forecast effort},
  series = {European Accounting Review},
  volume    = {24},
  journal   = {European Accounting Review},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Taylor \& Francis},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {0963-8180},
  doi       = {10.1080/09638180.2014.909291},
  pages     = {129 -- 146},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {We introduce a new way to measure the forecast effort that analysts devote to their earnings forecasts by measuring the analyst's general effort for all covered firms. While the commonly applied effort measure is based on analyst behaviour for one firm, our measure considers analyst behaviour for all covered firms. Our general effort measure captures additional information about analyst effort and thus can identify accurate forecasts. We emphasise the importance of investigating analyst behaviour in a larger context and argue that analysts who generally devote substantial forecast effort are also likely to devote substantial effort to a specific firm, even if this effort might not be captured by a firm-specific measure. Empirical results reveal that analysts who devote higher general forecast effort issue more accurate forecasts. Additional investigations show that analysts' career prospects improve with higher general forecast effort. Our measure improves on existing methods as it has higher explanatory power regarding differences in forecast accuracy than the commonly applied effort measure. Additionally, it can address research questions that cannot be examined with a firm-specific measure. It provides a simple but comprehensive way to identify accurate analysts.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Pietsch2015,
  author    = {Pietsch, Wolfram},
  title     = {Augmenting voice of the customer analysis by analysis of belief},
  series = {QFD-Forum},
  journal   = {QFD-Forum},
  number    = {30},
  issn      = {1431-6951},
  pages     = {1 -- 5},
  year      = {2015},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BeckerDelfmannDietrichetal.2016,
  author    = {Becker, J{\"o}rg and Delfmann, Patrick and Dietrich, Hanns-Alexander and Steinhorst, Matthias and Eggert, Mathias},
  title     = {Business Process Compliance Checking — Applying and Evaluating a Generic Pattern Matching Approach for Conceptual Models in the Financial Sector},
  series = {Information Systems Frontiers},
  volume    = {18},
  journal   = {Information Systems Frontiers},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Berlin},
  issn      = {1572-9419},
  doi       = {10.1007/s10796-014-9529-y},
  pages     = {359 -- 405},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Given the strong increase in regulatory requirements for business processes the management of business process compliance becomes a more and more regarded field in IS research. Several methods have been developed to support compliance checking of conceptual models. However, their focus on distinct modeling languages and mostly linear (i.e., predecessor-successor related) compliance rules may hinder widespread adoption and application in practice. Furthermore, hardly any of them has been evaluated in a real-world setting. We address this issue by applying a generic pattern matching approach for conceptual models to business process compliance checking in the financial sector. It consists of a model query language, a search algorithm and a corresponding modelling tool prototype. It is (1) applicable for all graph-based conceptual modeling languages and (2) for different kinds of compliance rules. Furthermore, based on an applicability check, we (3) evaluate the approach in a financial industry project setting against its relevance for decision support of audit and compliance management tasks.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Bernecker2016,
  author    = {Bernecker, Andreas},
  title     = {Divided we reform? Evidence from US welfare policies},
  series = {Journal of Public Economics},
  volume    = {142},
  journal   = {Journal of Public Economics},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {0047-2727},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.jpubeco.2016.08.003},
  pages     = {24 -- 38},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Divided government is often thought of as causing legislative deadlock. I investigate the link between divided government and economic reforms using a novel data set on welfare reforms in US states between 1978 and 2010. Panel data regressions show that, under divided government, a US state is around 25\% more likely to adopt a welfare reform than under unified government. Several robustness checks confirm this counter-intuitive finding. Case study evidence suggests an explanation based on policy competition between governor, senate, and house.},
  language  = {en}
}
@incollection{KrollLudwigs2017,
  author    = {Kroll-Ludwigs, Kathrin},
  title     = {Names of individuals},
  series = {European Encyclopedia of Private International Law},
  booktitle = {European Encyclopedia of Private International Law},
  publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing},
  address   = {Cheltenham, UK},
  isbn      = {9781782547228},
  year      = {2017},
  language  = {en}
}
@incollection{KrollLudwigs2017,
  author    = {Kroll-Ludwigs, Kathrin},
  title     = {Small Claims Regulation},
  series = {European Encyclopedia of Private International Law},
  booktitle = {European Encyclopedia of Private International Law},
  publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing},
  address   = {Cheltenham, UK},
  isbn      = {9781782547228},
  year      = {2017},
  language  = {en}
}