To shed light on the role that academic research plays in Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rulemaking, this paper examines the SEC's patterns of consumption of academic research from 2007 through 2017. We show how the Business Roundtable v. SEC ruling in 2011 increased consideration given to academic research during SEC rulemaking. We find that after the ruling, the SEC cites more papers in its proposed rules and, in particular, more papers that illustrate the costs of regulation. This change in academic citations results in fewer negative comment letters on proposed SEC regulations. We survey academics whose research was cited by the SEC, and the majority respond that the SEC's description of their work is completely or mostly accurate. When we survey general academics, their average rating of the SEC's accuracy is lower, although the rating improves regarding specific SEC quotes citing academic research. Although there is still room for a more substantive discussion of research, having a higher standard of cost‐benefit analysis leads to a more balanced discussion of academic research.

中文翻译：

---

学术研究在SEC规则制定中的作用：来自业务圆桌会议SEC的证据

为了阐明学术研究在证券交易委员会（SEC）规则制定中的作用，本文研究了SEC在2007年至2017年间消费学术研究的模式。2011年的裁决在SEC规则制定过程中更加重视学术研究。我们发现，在裁定之后，SEC在其拟议规则中引用了更多论文，尤其是更多说明监管成本的论文。学术引文的这种变化导致对拟议的SEC法规的负面评论信函减少。我们对美国证券交易委员会引用其研究的学者进行了调查，大多数人认为美国证券交易委员会对其工作的描述是完全或大部分准确的。当我们调查普通学者时，他们对SEC准确性的平均评分较低，尽管有关SEC引用的具体引用因学术研究而有所提高。尽管仍有进行更实质性的研究讨论的空间，