Search results

The primary objective of this paper is to investigate the relation between the joint provision of sustainability assurance and the readability of sustainability assurance statements. Additionally, it explores whether the presence of a female assurance partner influences the relation between the joint provision of sustainability assurance and the readability of sustainability assurance statements.

We analyzed a dataset comprising 882 firm-year observations from companies operating in sustainability sensitive industries for the period that spans the years 2016–2018.

The research indicates that joint sustainability assurance provision is associated with a more readable sustainability assurance statement, consistent with the “four-eyes” principle. Furthermore, the presence of a female assurance provider influences the joint assurance provision’s impact on sustainability assurance statement readability. Collectively, these results remain robust as they hold unchanged after controlling for endogeneity concerns.

This study provides novel insights into the recent sustainability assurance literature, being the first to examine joint assurance provision, assurance partner gender and sustainability assurance statement readability.

This study has the potential to catalyze regulatory and policy initiatives by providing compelling evidence in favor of mandating joint audits within the area of sustainability assurance practices. Additionally, this research contributes to the ongoing discussion about gender diversity in accounting and nonaccounting assurance firms, providing evidence of the positive impact of female assurance partners on sustainability assurance statement readability.

The regression results provide preliminary evidence on how the presence of a female audit partner influences the relationship between the sustainability assurance joint provision and sustainability assurance statement readability, an issue that has not been examined before.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether the amendments to International Accounting Standard (IAS) 39 and the introduction of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) 9 enhanced the readability, and thus the quality and usefulness of risk disclosure information.

Readability analyses are performed on companies listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) from 2005 to 2021. The sample period includes the period when companies disclosed information according to IAS 39 (2005–2017) and IFRS 9 (2018–2021).

The results of the analyses show risk disclosures for JSE-listed companies to be complex and difficult to understand. Furthermore, risk disclosures have become longer and less readable with the introduction of amendments to IAS 39 and the introduction of IFRS 9.

This study uses readability measures as a proxy for the complexity and usefulness of risk disclosures. The amount of utility a user of financial statements derives could be dependent on other factors such as the quality of disclosure, individual user background and perceptions.

The results have valuable implications for the various stakeholders that make use of the information contained in financial statements. Stakeholders such as regulators and standard setters should carefully assess how accounting standards change to ensure that one of the key objectives of the IASB, namely, to provide information that is relevant, reliable and understandable, is met.

The results of this study contribute to the discourse on the usefulness of companies’ risk disclosures. Though, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to compare the readability of risk disclosures from an emerging market perspective, the results can be applied to other countries using IFRS to assess the readability of risk disclosures.

This study aims to explore the intelligibility of communication with stakeholders as a result of accrual accounting adoption. It focuses on changes in the use of visual forms and the readability of text that occurred immediately after the adoption of accrual accounting in performance reports of Italian public universities.

The authors collect the stakeholder section of performance reports published before and after accrual accounting adoption. Then, the authors use manual and computer-assisted textual analysis. Finally, the authors explore the data using principal component analysis and qualitative comparative analysis.

This study demonstrates that switching from cash to accrual accounting provokes immediate changes in communication patterns. It confirms the significant reduction of readability and increase in visual forms after accruals accounting adoption. The results indicate that smaller universities especially put effort into increasing intelligibility while implementing a more complex accounting system. This study also finds a relation between the change in readability and the change in visual forms that are complementary, with the exception of several very large universities.

The findings underline the possibility of neutralising the adverse effects of accounting reform associated with its complexity and difficulties in understanding by the use of visual forms and attention to the document’s readability.

This paper adds a new dimension to the study of public sector accounting from the external stakeholder perspective. It provides further insight into the link between accrual accounting adoption and readability, together with the use of visual forms by universities.

Using a sample of oil and gas firms in the USA, the study examines the relation between the presence of hedging and annual report readability.

The authors use regression analysis to examine the relation between the presence of hedging and annual report readability.

The authors find that annual reports of firms with the use of hedging are less readable (i.e. difficult to read and understand). The authors also find that the primary results are more pronounced for firms with a higher level of business volatility.

The study contributes to the finance literature on the use and value of hedging and to the accounting literature on the determinants of annual report readability. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has persistently asked companies to improve the readability of their disclosures to stakeholders (SEC, 1998; 2013, 2014). Hence, the study not only identifies a potential determinant (i.e. hedging) that may influence the level of readability but also supports the current regulatory policy by the SEC, which is encouraging companies to improve readability.

This paper aims to investigate the moderating effect of sustainability reporting on the relationship between the independent variables of board diversity, and earnings management and the dependent variable of readability of financial statements.

The study panel data regression analysis involved 36 Kenyan-listed companies from 2016 to 2020.

Key findings were that increased board diversity was found to significantly improve the readability of financial statements. Discretionary earnings management was found to significantly reduce the readability of financial statements. Sustainability reporting was found to significantly increase the readability of financial statements, and it moderated the relationship between board diversity, earnings management and financial statements readability in Kenya.

The study sample of 36 non-financial listed in the Nairobi Securities Exchange was very small and was affected by the problem of thin trading; hence, caution should be adopted when interpreting the findings.

The Capital Markets Authorities (CMA) as a policymaker should enforce sustainability reporting by Kenyan listed firms as there is evidence that the reporting enhances the readability of financial statements. The Institute of Certified Public Accountants as a policymaker should closely monitor the published financial statements of firms for earnings management and punish the perpetrators, as there is empirical evidence that the practice reduces the readability of financial statements.

Sustainability reporting is successful as a moderating variable between readability of financial statements and determinants of readability of financial statements.

This study contributes to knowledge by studying sustainability reporting as a moderating variable between the independent variables of board diversity and earnings management and the dependent variable of readability of financial statements and measured sustainability reporting using a dummy variable for the period before and after the enactment and release of CMA code of 2016 on corporate governance that required sustainability reporting by Kenyan listed companies.

Financial reports are the basis of economic decisions that affect organizational interests and shareholders. However, there is a severe research gap concerning the factors affecting the quality of financial information (such as audit report readability and tone). Therefore, considering the importance of presenting high-quality financial information, this study aims to investigate the impact of intellectual capital (IC) and its components on the audit report's readability and tone.

The multivariate regression model tests research hypotheses. Then, hypotheses are tested via a sample of 824 observations of the listed companies on the Tehran Stock Exchange (103 companies) from 2014 to 2021, using the multivariate regression model based on pooled data and fixed effects.

Results determine that customer capital (CC) and structural capital (SC) are likely to influence the audit report tone positively. In general, the IC and human capital (HC) negatively impact auditors' tone. More analyses also document that IC and its CC, HC and SC components positively and significantly affect audit report readability based on two readability indices, including FOG and text length. Finally, findings pertaining to the third readability index (Flesch index) reveal that only HC and SC are robust based on this measurement, whereas the IC and CC have a negative and significant impact on the readability of auditors’ reports.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to address this issue in emerging markets, and it provides helpful insights for users, analysts and legal institutions regarding IC, which significantly affects audit report readability and tone.

In 2015, Bursa Malaysia Berhad (BMB) issued the first edition of the Sustainability Reporting Guide (SRG 1.0) to aid Malaysian public listed companies (PLCs) in preparing corporate social responsibility reporting (CSRR). After receiving users' commentaries, BMB issued the second edition of SRG (SRG 2.0) in 2018. Given the major amendments in CSRR regulatory guidelines, there is a need to analyze the readability of CSRR in light of the new guide and to investigate the combined effects of SRG 2.0 and the assurance of CSR information on the readability of CSRR.

This study employs two readability indices to compare the readability of CSRR ex-ante and ex-post the implementation of SRG 2.0 across a sample of Malaysian PLCs that maintained their market capitalization among the top 100 companies.

The practical findings of the multivariate regression revealed that the readability of CSRR is reduced after the introduction of SRG 2.0. Meanwhile, the readability of CSRR is positively influenced by combining the effect of SRG 2.0 and CSRR assurance.

This study provides empirical evidence that the amendment to CSRR has made CSR reports more challenging to read and thus reduces their communicative value. Therefore, in their quest to mandate more CSRR information from companies, regulators might need to consider advocating that such data is reported in a readable manner. This study also shows the influential role of CSR information assurance in enhancing the readability of CSRR.

This study helps assess the readability of CSRR among Malaysian companies after the adoption of SRG 2.0. It also contributes to the literature on CSRR, as the readability of such reporting within the context of Malaysia has not been widely examined in previous studies.

While existing research explores the impact of audit market competition on audit fees and audit quality, there is limited investigation into how competition in the audit market influences auditors' writing style. This study examines the relationship between audit market competition and the readability of audit reports in Iran, where competition is particularly intense, especially among private audit firms.

The sample comprises 1,050 firm-year observations in Iran from 2012 to 2018. Readability measures, including the Fog index, Flesch-Reading-Ease (FRE) and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), are employed to assess the readability of auditors' reports. The Herfindahl–Hirschman Index (HHI) is utilized to measure audit market competition, with lower index values indicating higher auditor competition. The concentration measure is multiplied by −1 to obtain the competition measure (AudComp). Alternative readability measures, such as the Flesch–Kincaid (FK) and Automated Readability Index (ARI) are used in additional robustness tests. Data on textual features of audit reports, auditor characteristics and other control variables are manually collected from annual reports of firms listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange (TSE).

The regression analysis results indicate a significant and positive association between audit market competition and audit report readability. Furthermore, a stronger positive and significant association is observed among private audit firms, where competition is more intense compared to state audit firms. These findings remain robust when using alternative readability measures and other sensitivity checks. Additional analysis reveals that the positive effect of competition on audit report readability is more pronounced in situations where the auditor remains unchanged and the audit market size is small.

This paper expands the existing literature by examining the impact of audit market competition on audit report readability. It focuses on a unique audit market (Iran), where competition among audit firms is more intense than in developed countries due to the liberalization of the Iranian audit market in 2001 and the establishment of numerous private audit firms.

The purpose of the research was to find out if there are any differences in the readability score between abstracts published in scientific journals from library and information science with and without an impact factor. Therefore, the author made a comparison between the readability of abstracts from one journal with (Journal of Documentation) and one journal without (Knjižnica or Library) an impact factor.

As a measure of readability, the Flesch Reading Ease Readability Formula was used. Then, with the help of statistical experts, a comparison of the readability scores between the abstracts of two selected journals was performed.

The results showed that some statistically important differences exist between the abstracts published in the Journal of Documentation and Knjižnica. The statistically important differences were found in the number of words and sentences in abstracts and in the readability of abstracts included in the research. Therefore, it can be said that there exists a statistically important difference between abstracts with and without an impact factor.

The primary purpose was to find out whether there is a statistically important difference in the readability score of abstracts with and without an impact factor in the field of library and information science. Some similar research studies have been conducted in other scientific fields.

This study aims to examine the correlation between the readability of financial statements and the likelihood of future stock price crashes in nonfinancial companies listed on the Egyptian Stock Exchange. It further explores the possible moderating effect of audit quality on this relationship.

The study uses ordinary least squares regression, generalized least squares estimation and two-stage least squares methodology to examine and validate the research hypotheses. The sample comprises 107 nonfinancial companies registered on the Egyptian Stock Exchange from 2016 to 2019.

The results reveal a significant negative association between the readability of financial statements and stock price crash risk. This suggests that companies with more complex financial statements tend to experience higher future crash risks. Additionally, the study identifies audit quality as a significant moderating factor. Higher audit quality, often indicated by engagements with Big-4 audit firms, strengthens the influence of financial statements readability on stock price crash risk. This implies that while high audit quality enhances investor confidence and market stability, it also accentuates the negative consequences of complex financial statements.

The findings of this paper have significant implications for regulators and standard-setting bodies in Egypt. They should consider refining and revising existing standards to emphasize the importance of enhancing the readability of financial reports. Additionally, auditing firms should actively engage in efforts to ensure clearer and more transparent financial reporting. These actions are vital for boosting investor confidence, strengthening Egypt’s capital market and mitigating potential risks associated with information opacity and complexity.

This study represents a pioneering endeavor within the Arab and Egyptian financial environments. To the best of the author’s knowledge, it is the first examination of the association between the readability of financial statements and stock price crash risk in these contexts. Furthermore, it explores factors such as audit quality that may influence this connection.