Table 6. Regional cultural differences and insurance companies’ local preferences.
| Variables | Insurer Dummy i,j,t | Holding Ratio i,j,t | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| dialect-same | dialect-different | dialect-same | dialect-different | |
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | |
| Local i,j,t | 0.1090 | 0.3504*** | 0.1061 | 0.3599*** |
| (0.56) | (4.15) | (0.53) | (3.95) | |
| controls | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| region- (city level), industry-, and year- FE | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| observations | 88,842 | 247,983 | 88,842 | 247,983 |
Columns 1 and 2 (Columns 3 and 4) of Table 6 present the results of sub-sample regressions for Eq (1) by using Insurer dummy (Holding Ratio), respectively, as two forms of proxies for Insurer, which is described and defined in Section 3.2. As displayed in columns 2 and 4, the regression coefficients of Local of 0.3504 (t = 4.15) and 0.3599 (t = 3.95), respectively, are both statistically significant and positive at the level of 1% in dialect-different groups. The numbers in parentheses are t -statistics and standard errors clustered at the firm and year level. * p<0.1; ** p<0.05; *** p<0.01.