Journal of Accounting Literature最新文献

Recent accounting research has connected the coercive and enabling types of formalisation (C/E) (Adler and Borys, 1996) with the distinction between diagnostic and interactive controls (D/I) proposed by Simons (1995, 2000) to tackle research questions on complex control situations involving both the degree of employee autonomy and patterns of management attention. The diverse conceptual approaches used for connecting C/E and D/I have led to fragmentation in the literature and raise concerns about their conceptual clarity. In this paper, we assess the conceptual clarity of various forms of connection between C/E and D/I. Firstly, we conduct an in-depth content analysis of 59 recent papers, and inductively identify three points of conceptual ambiguity and divergence in the literature (namely, the perspective from which a phenomenon is studied; whether categories capture choices driven by design or by style-of-use; and the properties of control systems). We also observe that the literature proposes various forms of connection (i.e. coexistence, inclusion, and combination approaches). Secondly, we use the three detected points of ambiguity and divergence as assessment criteria, and evaluate the extent to which conceptual clarity is at risk under each form of connection. Based on this assessment, we provide guidelines to enhance the conceptual clarity of the connections between C/E and D/I, propose several research models, and indicate opportunities for future research in this area.

This paper reviews academic literature related to the consequences that outside directors and boards may face in the wake of earnings restatements and suggests directions for future research. We examine loss of board seats; recruitment of new directors; proxy recommendations and shareholder support; pre-emptive director departures; director wealth effects; director reputation, litigation, and sanction risks; international evidence; and legal proposals for reform. The overall picture that emerges from the literature is that directors’ primary risk in the wake of earnings restatements is loss of board seats, in part through adverse proxy advisor recommendations and reduced shareholder support. Directors typically face little risk of legal liability or SEC sanctions, and some directors pre-emptively leave a problem company’s board and reduce their loss of interlocked board seats. Some legal scholars have called for director liability to be increased so as to promote more vigilant board oversight. Companies often focus on increasing the independence of the board in the wake of a restatement in an effort to repair organizational reputation. While researchers have revealed a host of important findings to date, much more can be learned about the effects of restatements on outside directors and boards.

The rule change for segment reporting in 1998 has arguably made segment reporting more relevant through the adoption of the management approach. Meanwhile, the management approach has resulted in a decrease in the comparability of segment income. We introduce firm-specific measures of changes in relevance and comparability due to the rule change. Our treatment firms experienced an increase in the relevance of segment reporting but a large decrease in the comparability of segment income; our benchmark firms barely experienced any changes in relevance and comparability. We examine earnings forecasts before vs. after the rule change issued by financial analysts—a major user group of segment reporting. Relative to benchmark firms, treatment firms’ analyst forecast error reductions around the segment disclosure event are not significantly different after the rule change than before the rule change, but treatment firms’ forecast dispersion reductions around the segment disclosure event are significantly larger after the rule change than before the rule change. These results suggest that despite the decrease in comparability, the new segment reporting rule has increased the decision usefulness of segment information by decreasing disagreement among analysts.

This paper provides a review of research on financial derivatives, with an emphasis on and comprehensive coverage of research published in 15 top accounting journals from 1996 to 2017. We begin with some brief institutional details about derivatives and then summarize studies explaining when and why firms use derivatives. We then discuss the evolution of the accounting rules related to derivatives (and associated disclosure requirements) and studies that examine changes in these requirements over the years. Next, we review the literature that examines the consequences of firms’ derivative use to various capital market participants (i.e., managers, analysts, investors, boards of directors, etc.), with an emphasis on the role that the accounting and disclosure rules play in such consequences. Finally, we discuss the importance of industry affiliation on firms’ derivative use and the role that industry affiliation plays in derivatives research. Overall, our review suggests that, perhaps due to their inherent complexity and data limitations, derivatives are relatively understudied in accounting, and we highlight several areas where future research is needed.

The emergence of social media as a corporate disclosure channel has caused significant changes in the production and dissemination of corporate information. This review identifies important themes in recent research on the impact of social media on the corporate information environment and provides suggestions for further explorations of this new but fast-growing area of research. Specifically, we first review the evolution of Internet-based corporate disclosure and related regulations, and then focus on three recent streams of research: 1) companies’ use of social media; 2) information produced by non-corporate users and its impact on capital markets; and 3) the credibility of corporate information on social media platforms.

Using a meta-regression analysis, we quantitatively review the empirical literature on the relation between effective tax rate (ETR) and firm size. Accounting literature offers two competing theories on this relation: The political cost theory, suggesting a positive size-ETR relation, and the political power theory, suggesting a negative size-ETR relation. Using a unique data set of 56 studies that do not show a clear tendency towards either of the two theories, we contribute to the discussion on the size-ETR relation in three ways: First, applying meta-regression analysis on a US meta-data set, we provide evidence supporting the political cost theory. Second, our analysis reveals factors that are possible sources of variation and bias in previous empirical studies; these findings can improve future empirical and analytical models. Third, we extend our analysis to a cross-country meta-data set; this extension enables us to investigate explanations for the two competing theories in more detail. We find that Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory, a transparency index and a corruption index explain variation in the size-ETR relation. Independent of the two theories, we also find that tax planning aspects potentially affect the size-ETR relation. To our knowledge, these explanations have not yet been investigated in our research context.

This study examines the use of linear regressions that include interaction terms, finding frequent interpretation errors in published accounting research. We provide insights on how to estimate, interpret, and present interactive regression models, and explain seldom-used but easily-implemented methods to report conditional marginal effects. We also examine the use of interaction terms in tax and financial reporting trade-off studies, evaluating the conceptual fit between a regression model with interactions and alternative definitions of trade-off. Although we advocate the use of interactive models, noise levels common in accounting research greatly reduce the ability to detect interaction effects.

In 2001, the US moved to regulate internal control reporting by management and auditors. While some jurisdictions have followed the lead of the US, many others have not. An important question, therefore, is the relevance of internal control to stakeholders. The more specific issue of the benefits of US-style regulation of internal control reporting is also topical. We review studies on the determinants of internal control quality and its economic consequences for stakeholders including investors, creditors, managers, auditors and financial analysts. We extend previous reviews by focusing on US studies published since 2013 as well as all non-US studies investigating IC quality including countries regulating IC disclosure as well as unregulated settings and both developed and developing economies. In doing so, we identify research questions where evidence remains mixed and new directions in which there are research opportunities.

Three main insights arise from our analysis. First, evidence on the economic consequences of internal control quality suggests that the quality of internal control can have a significant effect on decision making by users of financial information. Second, the results of research on the empirical association between ownership structure, certain board characteristics and internal control quality is generally mixed. Empirical evidence concerning the association between audit committee characteristics and internal control quality generally supports a positive and significant association. Finally, while studies in non-US jurisdictions are increasing, opportunities remain to explore the determinants and consequences of internal control in other jurisdictions. Our review provides evidence for policy makers of whether there are benefits from requiring management and auditors to report on internal control over financial reporting.

Whistleblowers have been credited for uncovering financial scandals in companies globally, including Enron, Olympus Corporation, and WorldCom. Despite increasing support and incentives for whistleblowing, there generally remains reluctance to blow the whistle. Thus, the purpose of this study is to review: (1) the determinants of internal and external whistleblowing on accounting-related misconduct, (2) U.S. whistleblowing legislation on accounting-related misconduct and related research, and (3) the effects of whistleblowing on firms and whistleblowers. Within each area, suggestions for future research are offered.

This paper provides a quantitative review of the literature on the repercussions of idiosyncratic information on firms’ cost of equity (CoE) capital. In total, I review the results of 113 unique studies examining the CoE effects of information Quantity, Precision and Asymmetry. My results suggest that the association between firm-specific information and CoE is subject to moderate effects. First, the link between Quantity and CoE is moderated by disclosure types and country-level factors in that firms in comparatively weakly regulated countries tend to enjoy up to four times greater CoE benefits from more expansive disclosure—depending on the type of disclosure—than firms in strongly regulated markets. Second, a negative relationship between Precision and CoE is only significant in studies using non-accrual quality proxies for Precision and risk factor-based (RFB)/valuation model-based (VMB) proxies for CoE. Third, almost all VMB studies confirm the positive association between Asymmetry and CoE, but there is notable variation in the conclusions reached when ex post CoE measurers are used.