Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relation between financial statement comparability and corporate investment efficiency of a large sample of US firms.

The authors use a large sample of US-listed firms from 1981 to 2013. The authors use several econometric methods including ordinary least square, firms fixed effects and mediation effects regression. Sensitivity tests that include the use of alternative measures of both the dependent and independent variables provide results that are consistent with the authors’ baseline model results.

The authors find that financial statement comparability mitigates risks associated with both under-investment and over-investment. They also find that product market competition mediates the relation between financial statement comparability and investment efficiency. The authors consider this to be a function of a competitive environment, whereby firms normally disclose less private information. This in turn reduces the effect of financial statement comparability on investment efficiency. Conversely, where there are higher levels of product market competition, it is less likely that firms will under-invest. Their results are consistent with these predictions.

The authors contribute to this growing field of research by providing evidence that financial statement comparability does in fact improve firms’ investment efficiency. Findings enhance our understanding of the relation between investment efficiency and financial statement comparability which is likely to have flow-on effects in terms of financial reporting quality and firm value. This study also contributes to research that links agency theory to financial statement comparability through an analysis of moral hazard and adverse selection tenets, and how it leads to reduced levels of investment inefficiency in a firm.

This study aims to concern about the relationship between management managerial attributes (management entrenchment, narcissism and overconfidence of the chief executive officer, board effort and real and accrual earnings management) and comparability of financial statements listed firms on the Tehran Stock Exchange. In other words, this paper aims to answer the question that “whether managerial attributes contribute significantly to the comparability of financial statements or not”.

The multivariate regression model is used for hypothesis testing. The hypotheses were examined using a sample of 768 listed observations on the Tehran Stock Exchange during 2012–2017 and by using from the multivariate regression pattern based on panel data techniques and the random-effects model.

The obtained results show a significant and negative relationship between management entrenchment, real and accrual earnings management, comparability and the relationship between management narcissism, overconfidence and board effort and comparability of financial statements is positive and significant.

As the present study is the pioneer study on such topics in the emerging markets, it provides valuable information concerning the intrinsic and acquired features of the management for users, analysts and legal institutions with a considerable impact on the comparability of financial statements. Moreover, this study’s results contribute significantly to the development of science and knowledge in this field and fill the gap in the literature.

As the comparability concept has recently garnered increased attention of policymakers and standard setters in the sustainability reporting (SR) arena, this paper aims to provide a reflexive viewpoint of this concept in this context.

To inform the authors’ viewpoint and disentangle the concept of comparability into different facets, the authors review policymakers’ and standard setters’ (including the Global reporting initiative) comparability principles, as well as relevant studies in the field. To provide insights into the different ways in which the comparability facets can be approached, the authors use multi-perspective reflexive practices and focus on the multiple purposes that reporting can serve. To empirically animate the authors’ reflection on the facets, the authors analyse the sustainability disclosures of two Italian banks over three years.

This study reveals that three facets form valuable starting points for extending the understanding of the meanings the comparability concept can carry in the SR arena. These facets are materiality and comparability, benchmarking/monitoring and comparability and operationalisation and comparability.

This study is intended to elicit policymakers’ and standard setters’ thoughts on the role of comparability and its complexities in SR.

By taking a critical and reflexive approach, the authors encourage policymakers and standard setters to reconsider the comparability principle, so it effectively embeds the accountability purpose of SR.

In this paper, the authors propose three facets for disentangling the concept of comparability.

Accounting comparability has been the subject of significant interest in empirical financial accounting research. Recent literature, particularly that following De Franco et al.’s (2011) influential study, has focused on utilizing the output of the financial reporting process to measure accounting comparability. In this paper, we conduct an early survey of studies using output-based measures of comparability. We provide two distinct contributions to the literature. First, we describe and comment on four important measurement concepts as well as the studies that introduced them. With this methodological contribution, we aim to facilitate the measurement choice for empirical accounting researchers engaged in comparability research. Second, we classify the sub-streams of literature and related studies. In providing this content-related contribution, we sum up what has already been achieved in output-based accounting comparability research and highlight potential areas for prospective research. As a whole, our study attempts to guide empirical researchers who (plan to) undertake studies on accounting comparability in selecting relevant topics and choosing adequate approaches to measurement.

Type of audit opinion is important for all stakeholders. Firm-specific characteristics have a direct impact on the type of audit opinion. The purpose of this study is to examine the association between accounting comparability (as a micro level characteristic), financial reporting quality (as a macro level characteristic) and audit opinions.

This study uses a multivariate regression analysis to tests it hypotheses to a sample of firms listed in Tehran Stock Exchange during 2015–2019. To measure accounting comparability, the authors use De Franco et al. (2011) model, and Hutton et al. (2009) model to measure financial reporting quality. The authors use type of audit opinion, and auditor's remarks (explanatory notes) as the measure for audit opinions.

The authors find a negative association between accounting comparability, and the proxies for audit opinion. The authors also find that a negative association between financial reporting quality and audit opinions. These results suggest that higher accounting comparability, and higher financial reporting quality (proxied by earnings quality) increases auditor tendency to issue unmodified audit opinion.

To the authors' best knowledge, this is the first study that empirically examines the association between accounting comparability, financial reporting quality and audit opinion. This study provides empirical support for the theoretical views on the association between financial reporting quality and audit opinion. The results could be of interest of both auditors and managers, especially in emerging capital markets, who seek to improve financial reporting quality.

This study aims to investigate the effect of the dynamics and potential of the board of directors on investment efficiency and the comparability of financial information in companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange.

The number of observations for this study includes 1,218 observations from companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange during 2014–2020. The authors used econometric statistical methods such as multiple linear regression, the Chow and Hausman test and the Kendall correlation coefficient using Eviews software to conduct the research. To measure the board’s effectiveness, two variables are used, including board dynamics and potential.

The results showed a positive and significant relationship between dynamics, board potential and investment efficiency. Also, no significant relationship was observed between the board dynamics and the comparability of financial information. Finally, a positive and significant relationship exists between the board’s potential and the comparability of financial information.

The importance of this research is the use of board proxies, including the dynamics and potential of the board. In addition, other variables of board characteristics, such as size, independence, ownership and gender, and the relationship between these variables with investment efficiency and comparability of financial information, have been examined in this study.

The study aims to investigate whether the adoption of IFRS could ensure ultimate intercompany comparability of operating performance in terms of uniformity in the application of accounting methods and reporting style.

Using content analysis on 125 annual financial statements of 25 companies from five industries listed on the Dhaka Stock Exchange in Bangladesh, this study reports that only the sole adoption and application of principle based IFRS cannot ensure ultimate intercompany comparability of financial reports.

The findings document that the adoption of IFRS cannot ensure the application of same accounting methods as well as way of presentations which is a precondition of greater comparability of operating performance of competitive firms. The methodological and reporting direction through local regulatory agencies alongside maximum compliance with principle based IFRS can enhance intercompany comparability of financial reports in the same industry.

This study tries to manifest that sole adoption cum implementation of IFRS could not ensure ultimate intercompany comparability of operating performance within the same industry and urges to conduct further research to find out the ways to do so.

This paper aims to explore the moderating role of state ownership variables on the relationship between market concentration (MC) and financial statement comparability (FSC) in Vietnam.

This study uses data from the financial statements of 475 nonfinancial listed companies for the period from 2010 to 2019. This study uses both the system generalized method of moments and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to consider the correlation and causal–effect relationships of the variables in the model.

The results show that MC has a positive relationship with FSC, and MC tends to exert a stronger impact on FSC for firms with higher state ownership. In addition, this study suggests that some combinations help improve FSC. This study has important implications for investors, managers and especially state-owned organizations when market power becomes fierce.

This study contributes to the literature on the comparability of financial statements in the context of developing countries that have not fully adopted International Financial Reporting Standards. Furthermore, this study applies the fsQCA method to complement the linear regression method.

eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) is an internet-based interactive form of reporting language that is expected to enhance the usefulness of financial reporting (Yuan and Wang, 2009). In the UK and the USA, XBRL is mandatory, and in Australia, it is voluntarily adopted. It has been reported that in the not too distant future, XBRL will be the standard format for the preparation and exchange of business reports (Gettler, 2015). Using an experimental approach, this study assesses the usefulness of financial reports with XBRL tagged information compared to PDF format information for non-professional investors. The authors investigate participants’ perceptions of usefulness in relation to the qualitative characteristics of relevance, understandability and comparability.

This paper uses an experimental approach featuring a profit-forecasting task to determine if participants perceive XBRL-tagged information to be more useful compared to PDF-formatted information.

Results reveal that financial information presented with XBRL tagging is significantly more relevant, understandable and comparable to non-professional investors.

The authors address a gap in the literature by examining XBRL usefulness in Australia where XBRL adoption will be mandated within the not too distant future. Currently, the voluntary adoption of XBRL by preparers and users is low, possibly, because of a lack of awareness about XBRL and its potential benefits. This study yields significant implications for the accounting regulators in creating more awareness on the benefits of using XBRL and to create an impetus for XBRL adoption.

This paper aims to analyze the economic and financial reporting consequences of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) adoption.

Literature review.

The survey of the IFRS adoption literature shows that the implementation of IFRS has been successful in reducing information asymmetry, improving the quality of information for users, enhancing transparency and comparability and positively influencing capital markets. In general, the positive effects of IFRS are associated with firms in strong enforcement regimes that have incentives to comply. The survey find enforcement of IFRS to be a recurring theme throughout the literature reviewed and is therefore an area which requires development.

In particular, there is a need to develop a mechanism for the enforcement of accounting standards internationally. Hence, there is a need for collaboration between the International Accounting Standards Board and regulatory bodies around the world to maximize the effectiveness of international accounting standards.

Given the considerable discussion about mandating IFRS for US firms by the Securities and Exchange Commission, this study’s results are both important and well-timed.