Search results

This study aims to investigate whether objective and subjective rationality affects individual voters’ use of accounting information and if such use affects voting behavior. While prior accounting studies assume voter rationality concerning financial performance and political outcomes, this study distinguishes between two types of voters: objective rational voters (who make voting decisions about multiple alternatives based on objective information) and subjective rational voters (who make decisions based on their subjective values, and thus do not explore information or explore only information biased toward one alternative). This study expects that accounting information can influence the voting behavior of objective and subjective rational voters.

Focusing on the 2020 Osaka Metropolitan Plan Referendum, this study used an online survey conducted on 768 respondents after the referendum.

This study finds that objective rational voters use accounting information more than subjective rational voters, voters who used accounting information were more likely to vote against the referendum, and voting behavior is not directly affected by the type of rationality of voters; rather, objective rational voters are more likely to use accounting information that has a mediating effect on voting behavior.

The results advance the understanding of public sector accounting research and practices by providing evidence of the individual voter’s use of accounting information and their voting behavior in political contexts.

The purpose of this paper is to summarise and reflect upon key issues at the interface of prices, information and regulation with a focus upon the stock market in context. Reflecting upon academic research in the area of efficient markets, and regulatory policy, the concern is to discern issues in terms of policy and support for policy. What does the research imply for policy? Is it possible that the research, perhaps given its rhetoric, can be misinterpreted in relation to policy? The study is also concerned to develop avenues for future research based on these considerations.

The paper is an analytical and critical review and writing.

The reading of the research suggests a pragmatic regulatory policy that should be concerned to improve stock market functioning, including with respect to information, as well as the context of which this is part. At the same time, the literature may be read as promoting anti-regulatory policy.

On the one hand, these are consistent with the pragmatic policy referred to above. On the other hand, further research is suggested to explore substantively the rhetoric of the research and its interpretation and to explore understandings of the research and its implications amongst key constituencies in practice.

The concern is to bring key insights from the academic literature together with a view to promoting a pragmatic policy orientation, while cautioning in a critical perspective about how this academic literature and research might be interpreted from a policy perspective.