مقاله انگلیسی رایگان در مورد فریب مدیریت، حسابداری بزرگ بانکی و عدم تقارن اطلاعات – الزویر 2018

 

مشخصات مقاله
ترجمه عنوان مقاله فریب مدیریت، حسابداری بزرگ بانکی و عدم تقارن اطلاعات: شواهدی از تجزیه و تحلیل زبانی
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله Management deception, big-bath accounting, and information asymmetry: Evidence from linguistic analysis
انتشار مقاله سال 2018
تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی 19 صفحه
هزینه دانلود مقاله انگلیسی رایگان میباشد.
پایگاه داده نشریه الزویر
نوع نگارش مقاله
مقاله پژوهشی (Research Article)
مقاله بیس این مقاله بیس میباشد
نمایه (index) Scopus – Master Journal List – JCR
نوع مقاله ISI
فرمت مقاله انگلیسی  PDF
ایمپکت فاکتور(IF)
2.155 در سال 2017
شاخص H_index 110 در سال 2019
شاخص SJR 1.771 در سال 2017
شناسه ISSN 0361-3682
شاخص Quartile (چارک) Q1 در سال 2017
رشته های مرتبط حسابداری، مدیریت
گرایش های مرتبط حسابداری مالی، مدیریت مالی، مدیریت اجرایی
نوع ارائه مقاله
ژورنال
مجله حسابداری، سازمان ها و جامعه – Accounting, Organizations and Society
دانشگاه  Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Canada
کلمات کلیدی فریب مدیریت، حسابداری بزرگ بانکی، تجزیه و تحلیل زبانی، عدم تقارن اطلاعات
کلمات کلیدی انگلیسی Management deception، Big-bath accounting، Linguistic analysis، Information asymmetry
شناسه دیجیتال – doi
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2018.02.004
کد محصول  E10884
وضعیت ترجمه مقاله  ترجمه آماده این مقاله موجود نمیباشد. میتوانید از طریق دکمه پایین سفارش دهید.
دانلود رایگان مقاله دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی
سفارش ترجمه این مقاله سفارش ترجمه این مقاله

 

فهرست مطالب مقاله:
Abstract

1- Introduction

2- Prior literature and hypothesis development

3- Data and research design

4- Empirical results

5- Additional analyses and robustness tests

6- Conclusion

References

بخشی از متن مقاله:

Abstract

Accounting big baths are pervasive in practice. While big baths can improve the information environment and reduce information asymmetry, they can also degrade the information environment and obscure operating performance. In this study, we examine the role of management ethics. Specifically, we investigate whether managers’ truthfulness (or conversely, deceptiveness) affects how investors perceive big baths. Using linguistic analysis on earnings-conference calls to measure managerial deception and employing a difference-in-differences research design with propensity-score matching, we find that information asymmetry is significantly higher following big baths taken by deceptive CEOs, compared with big baths taken by less deceptive CEOs.

Introduction

How does a firm’s information environment change after accounting big baths? Prior literature provides evidence on both positive (Elliott & Shaw, 1988; Francis, Hanna, & Vincent, 1996; Haggard, Howe, & Lynch, 2015) and negative (Bens & Johnston, 2009; Kirschenheiter & Melumad, 2002; Kothari, Shu, and Wysocki 2009; Moore, 1973) consequences of big baths on the information environment. As managers have discretion regarding whether to incur a large write-off, and can decide the timing and amount of the write-off, management’s incentives are important in studying the effects of big baths. However, such incentives are unobservable. Investors may use managerial characteristics to infer management incentives. Among the most salient managerial characteristics in this setting is truthfulness; thus this study examines how truthfulness (or conversely, deceptiveness) affects investors’ perceptions of big baths. According to upper-echelons theory (Hambrick & Mason, 1984), the ethical attentiveness throughout the organization is instilled by its leaders (Patelli & Pedrini, 2015). A series of accounting fraud scandals over the last decades put leadership ethics at the forefront of the heated debate on financial-reporting truthfulness (Mihajlov & Miller, 2012; Tourish & Vatcha, 2005). Ethics is an intrinsic part of managers’ behavior (Solomon, 1992). As firms’ high-level decision makers, top managers are likely to follow a cognitive and rational approach that revolves around moral judgments about the issues when making ethical decisions, just as an individual making a choice when facing an ethical dilemma (Albert, Scott, and Turan 2015; Kohlberg, 1981; Reynolds, 2006; Vitell, Lumpkin, and Rawwas 1991; Weber, 1990). Big baths are managerial decisions that can be the result of managers’ ethical considerations of the firms’ welfare, or can be the result of managers’ incentives to maximize their personal utility. Being truthful or deceptive to investors and other stakeholders also indicates management’s ethical choice of how they view their responsibility to the firm’s stakeholders. On one hand, big baths can manifest themselves as exceptionally large negative discretionary accruals. On the other hand, big baths can consist of one-time, large write-offs, and may include restructuring charges, asset impairments, and litigation losses. These write-offs are generally reflected as “special items” in the financial statements. There are two ways to look at a big bath. If a company reports a loss that is larger than expectations, it could be the case that there are certain issues within the firm that warrant such actions and that managers are truthfully conveying such information to the capital market and other stakeholders. In line with that view, some analysts interpret big baths as managers’ positive response to existing problems (Elliott & Shaw, 1988). Big baths can also “clear the air” (Haggard et al., 2015). That is, by writing off assets when their carrying values are less than the market values, the reported values of the assets are realigned with their economic values. As a result, firm-level information asymmetry following a big bath should decrease.

دیدگاهتان را بنویسید

نشانی ایمیل شما منتشر نخواهد شد. بخش‌های موردنیاز علامت‌گذاری شده‌اند *

دکمه بازگشت به بالا