Search results

This study aims to investigate two issues inherent in accounting judgements: the directional influence of uncertainty expressions and how they might positively or negatively affect accounting judgements and the foreign-language effect (FLE), which refers to the reduction of judgement bias that occurs when an accounting judgement is made in one’s foreign language. This study examines both issues in the context of accounting judgements made in Chinese and English languages.

This study conducted two experiments. The first experiment applied a 2 × 2 between-subject research design, and the second experiment adopted a 2 × 2 within-subject approach.

The overall results revealed that directionality biases existed in the exercise of accounting judgement in subjects’ native and foreign languages. However, when the language was switched from the subjects’ native tongue to a foreign language, overall directionality biases are reduced.

This study suggests that the use of native and non-native languages can have unintended consequences on accounting judgements. However, because of the limitations of using students as proxies for professionals and applying self-assessed language scales, the literature would benefit from future research that extends the subject profile to professional accountants and that assesses language skills more objectively.

This study contributes to the literature on cross-lingual accounting, both theoretically and methodologically. It also extends the FLE theory to an accounting context, providing insights on how language is involved in judgements concerning uncertainty expressions.

Recognising the growing importance of professional judgement within professional accounting, this paper examines how it relates to Aristotelian practical wisdom, with reference to the ethical failure at Carillion plc in 2018. This includes an examination of how these concepts are similar and how they differ and a reconceptualisation of professional judgement in Aristotelian terms.

The conventional understanding of professional judgement is articulated with reference to accounting standards, professional accounting institutions and academic research. This is compared to Aristotelian practical wisdom, as presented in the Nicomachean Ethics. Both of these conceptualisations are analysed with reference to the failure of Carillion plc.

Some similarities as well as significant differences between the conventional conceptualisation of professional judgement and Aristotelian practical wisdom are identified. Application to the accounting failure of Carillion plc shows how an Aristotelian reconceptualisation of professional judgement, as an ethical concept, provides a more adequate understanding of unethical accounting behaviour.

The analysis identifies aspects of professional judgement in accounting that have not previously been explored empirically, but which nevertheless have empirical support in other domains.

Professional judgement is reconceptualised in ethical terms, which informs how professional bodies and firms should conceive and apply this concept.

Although there has been research on judgement informed by psychology, there has been little research linking judgement and wisdom in an accounting context. This paper utilises a philosophically informed perspective on wisdom to reconceptualise professional judgement in a way that provides a more adequate understanding of ethical failures.

It is well known that information behaviour can be biased in countless ways and that users of web search engines have difficulty in assessing the credibility of results. Yet, little is known about how search engine result page (SERP) listings are used to judge credibility and in which if any way such judgements are biased. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Two studies are presented. The first collects data by means of a controlled, web-based user study (N=105). Studying judgements for three controversial topics, the paper examines the extent to which users agree on credibility, the extent to which judgements relate to those applied by objective assessors and to what extent judgements can be predicted by the users’ position on and prior knowledge of the topic. A second, qualitative study (N=9) utilises the same setup; however, transcribed think-aloud protocols provide an understanding of the cues participants use to estimate credibility.

The first study reveals that users are very uncertain when assessing credibility and their impressions often diverge from objective judges who have fact checked the sources. Little evidence is found indicating that judgements are biased by prior beliefs or knowledge, but differences are observed in the accuracy of judgements across topics. Qualitatively analysing think-aloud transcripts from participants think-aloud reveals ten categories of cues, which participants used to determine the credibility of results. Despite short listings, participants utilised diverse cues for the same listings. Even when the same cues were identified and utilised, different participants often interpreted these differently. Example transcripts show how participants reach varying conclusions, illustrate common mistakes made and highlight problems with existing SERP listings.

This study offers a novel perspective on how the credibility of SERP listings is interpreted when assessing search results. Especially striking is how the same short snippets provide diverse informational cues and how these cues can be interpreted differently depending on the user and his or her background. This finding is significant in terms of how search engine results should be presented and opens up the new challenge of discovering technological solutions, which allow users to better judge the credibility of information sources on the web.

Research on biases in investment decision-making is indubitably important; however, studies in this context are relatively scarce. Unpacking bias has received attention in the psychological literature yet very little attention from management accounting research. This bias suggests that the perceived probability that an event will occur generally increases when the event's description is unpacked into a disjunction of subevents. The authors hypothesize that for a capital investment decision context, managers' judgement of the probability of a future event depends on whether the event is described as one packed event or is unpacked into several disjoint subevents. Additionally, the authors propose that altering the format of the description of an event's occurrence from percentage values to relative frequencies reduces unpacking bias.

To test the study’s hypotheses, the authors conducted two experiments based on a 3 × 2 mixed experimental design in which manager participants were asked to estimate the failure probabilities of technical systems in the context of an investment decision.

The authors provide evidence that unpacking bias occurs in an investment scenario, which can be characterized as a high-stakes decision context. Changing the format in which probabilities are presented from percentage values to relative frequencies significantly reduces the bias.

Additional instructions did not further reduce unpacking bias.

For investment decisions under uncertainty, performance indicators in management templates should be presented in relative frequencies to improve managerial decision-making. The fact that the authors could not show an additional effect of instructions in management accounting reports indicates that it is challenging for management accountants to reduce the biased decision-making of managers by “teaching” them through the provision of instructions.

The authors contribute to accounting research by illustrating unpacking bias and by deriving a debiasing mechanism in a capital investment decision context.

This paper aims to examine how balanced scorecard (BSC) users change their judgement processes according to qualitative changes in the BSC. Prior experimental studies have found that decision-makers do not fully adapt their judgements according to changes in financial reports, known as functional fixation. Although previous research has examined functional fixation in several management accounting-related disciplines, the research has not been completely successful in developing a deeper understanding of the cognitive processes that are responsible for the occurrence of this judgemental bias.

To fill this gap, a combination of structural modelling and a process tracing method that monitors participants’ information acquisition to better understand the underlying cognitive processes that affect BSC users’ judgements is used.

Overall, the results indicate that functional fixation is present both from an input–output (structural modelling) and a process tracing perspective. Stable general individual differences, particularly in terms of intuitive versus deliberative preferences in decision-making, influence the probability of functionally fixated behaviour. Additionally, previous findings concerning the over-reliance on financial information in the BSC setting is replicated. Using process data, it was found that BSC users rely more on financial measures than on non-financial measures in the pre-decisional phase of exercising their judgement.

This paper contribute to management accounting research on the BSC by investigating two cognitive biases (functional fixation and overreliance on financial measures) from an input–output and a process tracing perspective.

Information verification is an important factor in commercial valuation practice. Valuers use their professional autonomy to decide on the level of verification required, thereby creating an opportunity for client-related judgement bias in valuation. The purpose of this paper is to assess the manifestation of client attachment risks in information verification.

A case-based questionnaire was used to retrieve data from 290 commercial valuation professionals in the Netherlands, providing a 15 per cent response rate of the Dutch commercial valuation population. Descriptive and inferential statistics have been used to test research hypotheses involving relations between information verification and professional features that may indicate client attachment such as an executive job level and brokerage experience.

The results reveal that valuers acting at partner level within their organisation obtain lower scores on information verification compared to lower-ranked valuers. Also, brokerage experience correlates negatively to information verification of valuation professionals. Both findings have statistical significance.

The results reflect valuers’ reasoning behaviour rather than actual behaviour. Replication of findings through experimental design will contribute to research validity.

Maintaining close client contact in a competitive environment is important for business continuity yet may foster client attachment. The associated downside risks in valuation practice call for higher awareness of (subconscious) client influence and the development of attitudinal scepticism in valuer training programmes.

This paper is one of the few that explore possible sources of valuer judgement bias by relating client-friendly valuer features to a key area of valuation i.e. information verification.

Making rational and undistorted corporate investment decisions is critically important to organisations. “Scientific” investment appraisal can play a central role, particularly setting the hurdle rate. Empirical research reveals that actual rates generally exceed organisations’ cost of capital – the so-called hurdle rate premium (HRP) puzzle. Allowing for bounded rationality of corporate decision-makers, the purpose of this paper is to mobilise the retrievability cognitive bias as one explanation of this paradox.

A systematic structuring and investigation of the legacy of eight scenarios, representing “correct” and “incorrect” decisions on “good” and “bad” proposals, is used to explain the inconsistency between normative capital investment theory and actual practice.

Decision makers’ cognitive processes based on informal perceptions, strengthened by the scope of formal post-audit routines, provide a plausible explanation why investment decision makers tend to systematically set hurdle rates too high.

The findings have still to be explored in more depth by fieldwork and experimental research.

The policy implications of this study are that corporate success could be enhanced by making executives aware of the HRP phenomenon and of its behavioural causes; also by including significant rejected investment proposals in the post-audit programme and communicating the opportunity cost of “false negative” decisions on proposals not adopted.

The paper provides a new explanation for a recognised phenomenon: Allowing for bounded rationality of corporate decision-makers, the paper applies research on a cognitive bias to the setting of the hurdle rate in investment appraisal.

A theory of pre‐bid building price forecasting accuracy is proposed, based on the heuristic bias framework and with reference to the common practice of basing building price forecasts on the price per square metre of floor area, termed here as Price Intensity (PI). The main prediction of the theory, that high PI contracts will be underestimated and low PI contracts will be overestimated, is tested by a re‐analysis of a set of Singapore data and in comparison with previous work.

This paper synthesizes the extant research on the outcome effect in the accounting domain, focusing primarily on the context of performance evaluation. It reviews the current state of our knowledge about this phenomenon, including its underlying cognitive and motivational causes, the contexts in which the outcome effect is observed, the factors that influence its various manifestations, and ways in which undesirable outcome effects can be mitigated. It also considers various perspectives about the extent to which outcome effects represent undesirable judgmental bias, and whether this distinction is necessary to motivate research on this topic. The paper is intended to motivate and facilitate future research into the effects of outcome knowledge on judgment in the accounting context. Therefore, we also identify important unanswered questions and discuss opportunities for future research throughout the paper. These include additional consideration of instances in which the outcome effect is reflective of bias, how this bias can be effectively mitigated, ways in which outcome information influences judgment (regardless of whether this influence is considered normative), and how the underlying causes of the outcome effect operate singly and jointly to bring about the outcome effect. We also consider ways that future research can contribute to practice by determining how to encourage evaluators to retain and incorporate the relevant information conveyed by outcomes, while avoiding the inappropriate use of outcome information, and by enhancing external validity to increase the generalizability of experimental results to scenarios frequently encountered in practice.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the manner in which the rate of product consumption contributes to the formation and strengthening of the price-quality heuristic.

The research included a literature review with a series of tests across a sequence of blind and sighted tasting experiments involving 278 subjects assessing seven differently priced products of orange juice, coffee and wine.

The paper found evidence that consumption rates do affect the way consumers respond to price information and that sight-based “System 1” judgement errors accrue and increase progressively with consumption. This relationship was observed to be stronger in sight-based product assessments for consumption of four or more units per week compared to those consuming one unit per week. For blind-based product assessments, an inverse relationship between price affect and consumption was observed, with affect reported to be stronger for minimal rates of consumption.

The observation of sight-based and blind-based affect relationships which are dependent on the levels of product consumption appears to be an interesting advancement in consumer behaviour research. This provides support for a dual structure of rationality operated by an interconnection between “System 1” sight-based associations and “System 2” blind-based ponderous thinking. The paper further provides support for Kahneman’s “conflation of intuition” as classically conditioned memory.