The evolution of stock option accounting: Disclosure, voluntary recognition, mandated recognition, and management disavowals

Accounting Review

Volumn 81, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 1073-1093

  Frederickson, James R ^a   Hodge, Frank D ^b   Pratt, Jamie H ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^c INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Disavowals; Mandated disclosures; Stock options; Voluntary disclosures

Indexed keywords

EID: 34247518979     PISSN: 00014826     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/accr.2006.81.5.1073     Document Type: Review

References (58)

1. Aboody, D., M. Barth, and R. Kasznik. 2004. Firms' voluntary recognition of stock-based compensation expense. Journal of Accounting Research (May): 123-150.
2. Accounting Principles Board (APB). 1972. Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees. Opinion No. 25. New York, NY: America Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
3. Bagnoli, M., and S. Watts. 2005. Conservative accounting choices. Management Science 51: 786-801.
4. Ball, R., and P. Brown. 1968. An empirical evaluation of accounting income numbers. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 159-178.
5. Barth, M., G. Clinch, and T. Shibano. 2003. Market effects of recognition and disclosure. Journal of Accounting Research (September): 581-609.
6. Barton, J., and G. Waymire. 2004. Investor protection under unregulated financial reporting. Journal of Accounting and Economics 38: 65-116.
7. Beaver, W. 1968. The information content of annual earnings announcements. Journal of Accounting Research (Supplement): 67-92.
8. Bernard, V., and K. Schipper. 1994. Recognition and disclosure in financial reporting. Working paper, University of Michigan.
9. Blacconiere, W., J. Frederickson, M. Johnson, and M. Lewis. 2004. Voluntary disclosures that disavow mandated disclosures: The case of stock options. Working paper, Indiana University.
10. Block, S. 1999. A study of financial analysts: Practice and theory. Financial Analysts Journal (July/August): 86-95.
11. Botosan, C., and M. Plumlee. 2001. Stock option expense: The sword of Damocles revealed. Accounting Horizons 15 (December): 311-328.
12. Cotter, J., and I. Zimmer. 2003. Disclosure versus recognition: The case of asset revaluations. Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting and Economics 10: 81-99.
13. Crooch, M. 2005. Presentation at the Financial Reporting Conference. Seattle, Washington, May.
14. Davis-Friday, P., L. Folami, C. Liu, and H. Mittelstaedt. 1999. The value relevance of financial statement recognition versus disclosure: Evidence from SFAS No. 106. The Accounting Review (October): 403-423.
15. _, C. Liu, and H. Mittelstaedt. 2004. Recognition and disclosure reliability: Evidence from SFAS No. 106. Contemporary Accounting Research (Summer): 399-429.
16. Eagly, A., and S. Chaiken. 1975. An attribution analysis of the effect of communicator characteristics on opinion change: The case of communicator attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (July): 136-144.
17. Elayan, F., K. Pukthuanthong, and R. Roll. 2005. Investors like firms that expense employee stock options and they dislike firms that fail to expense. Journal of Investment Management 3 (First Quarter).
18. Espahbodi, H., P. Espahbodi, Z. Rezaee, and H. Rehranian. 2002. Stock price reaction and value relevance of recognition versus disclosure: The case of stock-based compensation. Journal of Accounting and Economics 33 (3): 343-373.
19. Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). 1980. Qualitative Characteristics of Accounting Information. Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts No. 2. Norwalk, CT: FASB.
20. _. 1984. Recognition and Measurement in Financial Statements of Business Enterprises. Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts No. 5. Norwalk, CT: FASB.
21. _. 1995. Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123. Norwalk, CT: FASB.
22. _. 2004. Shared Based Payments. Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123R. Norwalk, CT: FASB.
23. Fiske, S., and M. Pavelchak. 1986. Category-based versus piecemeal-based affective responses: Developments in schema-triggered affect. In Handbook of Motivation and Cognition, edited by R. Sorrentino, and E. Higgins, 167-203. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
24. Frederickson, J., and J. Miller. 2004. The effects of pro forma earnings disclosures on analysts' and nonprofessional investors' equity valuation judgments. The Accounting Review 79 (July): 667-686.
25. Frost, C. 1997. Disclosure policy choices of UK firms receiving modified audit reports. Journal of Accounting and Economics 23: 163-187.
26. Fuller, R., and R. Metcalf. 1978. Management disclosures: Analysts prefer facts to management's predictions. Financial Analysts Journal (March-April): 55-57.
27. Glover, S. 1997. The influence of time pressure and accountability on auditor's processing of non-diagnostic information. Journal of Accounting Research 35 (Autumn): 213-226.
28. Graham, J., and C. Harvey. 2001. The theory and practice of corporate finance: Evidence from the field. Journal of Financial Economics (May/June): 187-243.
29. _, _, and S. Rajgopal. 2005. The economic implications of corporate financial reporting. Journal of Accounting and Economics 40 (December): 3-73.
30. Hackenbrack, R. 1992. Implications of seemingly irrelevant evidence in audit judgments. Journal of Accounting Research (Spring): 126-136.
31. Harper, R., W. Mister, and J. Strawser. 1987. The impact of new pension disclosure rules on perceptions of debt. Journal of Accounting Research 25 (Autumn): 327-330.
32. Hirst, E., L. Koonce, and P. Simko. 1995. Investor reactions to financial analysts' research reports. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 335-351.
33. _, and P. Hopkins. 1998. Comprehensive income reporting and analysts' valuation judgments. Journal of Accounting Research 36 (Supplement): 47-75.
34. _, _, and J. Wahlen. 2004. Fair values, income measurement, and bank analysts' risk and valuation judgments. The Accounting Review (April): 453-472.
35. Hodge, F. 2003. Investors' perceptions of earnings quality, auditor independence, and the usefulness of audited financial information. Accounting Horizons (Supplement): 37-48.
36. _, S. Kennedy, and L. Maines. 2004. Does search-facilitating technology improve the transparency of financial reporting? The Accounting Review 79 (3): 687-703.
37. _, P. Hopkins, and J. Pratt. 2006. Management reporting incentives and classification credibility: The effects of reporting discretion and reputation. Accounting, Organizations and Society 31 (October): 623-634.
38. Hoffman, V., and J. Patton. 1997. Accountability, the dilution effect, and conservatism in auditor's fraud judgments. Journal of Accounting Research 35 (Autumn): 227-237.
39. Hopkins, P. 1996. The effect of financial statement classification of hybrid financial instruments on financial analysts' stock price judgments. Journal of Accounting Research (Supplement): 33-50.
40. Hughes, S. 2005. Second Update: SEC OKs delay in options expensing. Dow Jones Newswire (April 14).
41. Imhoff, E., R. Lipe, and D. Wright. 1993. The effects of recognition versus disclosure on shareholder risk and executive compensation. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance 8 (4): 335-368.
42. Kelley, H. 1972. Attribution in social interaction. In Attributions: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior, edited by E. Jones, D. Kanouse, H. Kelley, R. Nisbett, S. Valins, and B. Weiner, 151-174. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
43. Koch, A. 1999. Financial distress and the credibility of management earnings forecasts. Working paper, Carnegie Mellon University.
44. Levine, C., and J. Hughes. 2005. Management compensation and earnings-based covenants as signaling devices in credit markets. Journal of Corporate Finance 11: 832-850.
45. Libby, R., M. Nelson, and J. Hunton. 2005. Recognition v. disclosure and auditor misstatement correction: The cases of stock compensation and leases. Working paper, Cornell University.
46. Maines, L., and L. McDaniel. 2000. Effects of comprehensive income volatility on nonprofessional investors' judgments: the role of presentation format. The Accounting Review 75 (April): 179-207.
47. Malkiel, R., and W. Baumol. 2002. Stock options keep the economy afloat. Wall Street Journal (April 4): 18.
48. Nelson, M., J. Elliott, and R. Tarpley. 2002. Evidence from auditors about managers' and auditors' earnings management decisions. The Accounting Review (Supplement): 175-202.
49. Nichols, D., and J. Wahlen. 2004. How do earnings numbers relate to stock returns? A review of classic accounting research with updated evidence. Accounting Horizons 18 (December): 263-286.
50. Nisbett, R., H. Zukier, and R. Lemley. 1981. The dilution effect: Nondiagnostic information weakens the implications of diagnostic information. Cognitive Psychology 13 (April): 248-277.
51. New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). 2001. Fact Book. New York, NY: NYSE.
52. Pitt, H. 2001. Remarks delivered to the AICPA governing council. Miami Beach, Florida, October 22.
53. Revsine, L., D. Collins, and B. Johnson. 2002. Financial Reporting and Analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
54. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 2005. Commission amends compliance dates for FASB statement No. 123R on employee stock options. Press Release 2005-57. April 14. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
55. Spence, A. 1974. Market Signaling: Informational Transfer in Hiring and Related Screening Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
56. Titman, S., and B. Trueman. 1986. Information quality and the valuation of new issues. Journal of Accounting and Economics 8 (2): 159-172.
57. Tversky, A., and D. Kahneman. 1974. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 185: 1124-1131.
58. Wahlen, J. 1994. The nature of information in commercial bank loan loss disclosures. The Accounting Review (July): 455-478.