The impact of tagging qualitative financial information on investor decision making: Implications for XBRL

International Journal of Accounting Information Systems

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 2-20

  Arnold, Vicky ^a   Bedard, Jean C ^b,c   Phillips, Jillian R ^d   Sutton, Steve G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA   (United States)

^b BENTLEY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^d UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO   (United States)

Author keywords

Investment decisions; Material weakness; MD A; Risk; XBRL

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857030847     PISSN: 14670895     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.accinf.2011.12.002     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Arnold V., Bedard J.C., Phillips J., Sutton S.G. The impact of risk on investor decision processes and outcomes in the Post-SOX environment Working paper. http://www.finrafoundation.org/web/groups/foundation/@foundation/documents/foundation/p118445.pdf.
2. Arnold V., Bedard J.C., Phillips J., Sutton S.G. Understanding professional and non-professional investors' information requirements Working paper. http://www.finrafoundation.org/web/groups/foundation/@foundation/documents/foundation/p118443.pdf.
3. Baldwin A., Brown C., Trinkle B. XBRL: an impacts framework and research challenge. J Emerg Technol Account 2006, 3:97-116.
4. Barron O., Kile C., O'Keefe T. MD&A quality as measured by the SEC and analysts' earnings forecasts. Contemp Account Res 1999, 16(1):75-109.
5. Bonson E., Cortijo V., Escobar T. Towards the global adoption of XBRL using International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). Int J Account Inf Syst 2009, 10(1):46-60.
6. Boritz J.E., No W.G. The SEC's XBRL voluntary filing program on EDGAR: a case for quality assurance. Curr Issues Auditing 2008, 2(2):A36-A50.
7. Bouwman M., Frishkoff P., Frishkoff P. How do financial analysts make decisions? A process model of the investment screening decision. Account Org Soc 1987, 12(1):1-29.
8. Bryan S. The incremental information content of required disclosures contained in management discussion and analysis. Account Rev 1997, 72(2):285-301.
9. Chi M.T.H., Glaser R., Rees E. Expertise in problem solving. Advances in the psychology of human intelligence 1982, 1:1-75. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. R.S. Sternberg (Ed.).
10. Ciesielski J. XBRL budges toward user-friendliness. The analysts accounting observer weblog [February 19]. http://www.accountingobserver.com/PublicBlog/tabid/54/EntryId/12294/XBRL-Budges-Toward-User-Friendliness.aspx.
11. Clarkson P., Kao J., Richardson G. Evidence that management discussion and analysis (MD&A) is a part of a firm's overall disclosure package. Contemp Account Res 1999, 16(1):111-134.
12. Cole C., Jones C. Management discussion and analysis: a review and implications for further research. J Account Lit 2005, 24:135-174.
13. Dechow P.M., Sloan R.G., Sweeney A. Causes and consequences of earnings manipulation: an analysis of firms subject to enforcement actions by the SEC. Contemp Account Res 1996, 13:1-36.
14. Elliott W.B. Are investors influenced by pro forma emphasis and reconciliations in earnings announcements?. Account Rev 2006, 81(1):113-133.
15. Enhanced Business Reporting Consortium (EBRC) The enhanced business reporting framework 2006.
16. Feroz E., Park K., Pastena V. The financial and market effects of the SEC's accounting and auditing enforcement releases. J Account Res 1991, 29:107-142. (Supplement).
17. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 Public Law 95-213. 95th Cong., 1st Sess. 19 1977, [December 1977].
18. Frederickson J.R., Miller J.S. The effects of proforma earnings disclosures on analysts' and nonprofessional investors equity valuation judgments. Account Rev 2004, 79(3):667-686.
19. Hodge F., Pronk M. The impact of expertise and investment familiarity on investors' use of online financial report information. J Account Auditing Finance 2006, 21(3):267-292.
20. Hodge F., Kennedy J., Maines L. Does information-search technology improve the transparency of financial reporting?. Account Rev 2004, 79(3):687-703.
21. Hogarth R. Judgment and choice 1980, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK.
22. Hunton J.E., McEwen R. An assessment of the relation between analysts' earnings forecast accuracy, motivational incentives and cognitive information search strategy. Account Rev 1997, 72(3):497-515.
23. IASB Discussion paper: Management commentary 2005, International Accounting Standards Board, London, [October].
24. IASB Management commentary exposure draft ED/2009/6 2009, International Accounting Standards Board, London, [June].
25. IASB Work plan for IFRSs: managements commentary 2010, International Accounting Standards Board, London, [September 8].
26. IFAC Financial reporting supply chain: current perspectives and directions 2008, International Federation of Accountants, New York, [March].
27. Koonce L., McAnally M., Mercer M. How do investors judge the risk of financial items?. Account Rev 2005, 80(1):221-241.
28. Larsen T. XBRL from the analyst-investor perspective. NYSSA-XBRL Conference 2007, [April 11].
29. Larsen T. The X-factor: get ready for eXtensible Business Reporting Language 2008, 40-41. CFA Magazine, [Sept-Oct].
30. Laux B. EBRC proposes new XBRL taxonomy for the MD&A. Hitachi Data Interactive.com [August 10]. http://hitachidatainteractive.com/2009/04/15/ebrc-proposes-new-xbrl-taxonomy-for-the-mda/.
31. Locke J. XBRL and retail investors: where are the missing masses? Hitachi Data Interactive.com [August 10]. http://hitachidatainteractive.com/2009/08/10/xbrl-and-retail-investors-where-are-the-missing-masses/.
32. Locke J., Lowe A. XBRL: an (Open) source of enlightenment or disillusionment. Eur Account Rev 2007, 16(3):585-623.
33. Maines L., McDaniel L. Effects of comprehensive income volatility on nonprofessional investors' judgments: the role of presentation format. Account Rev 2000, 75:179-207.
34. McKnight D.H., Choudhury V., Kacmar C. Developing and validating trust measures for E-Commerce: an integrative typology. Inf Syst Res 2002, 13(3):334-359.
35. Nourayi M. Stock price responses to the SEC's enforcement actions. J Account Public Policy 1994, 13:333-347.
36. Plumlee R.D., Plumlee M.A. Assurance on XBRL for financial reporting. Account Horiz 2008, 22(3):353-368.
37. Rogers R., Grant J. Content analysis of information cited in reports of sell-side financial analysts. J Financ Statement Anal 1997, 3:17-30.
38. Rowbottom N., Lymer A. Exploring the use of online corporate reporting information. J Emerg Technol Account 2009, 6:27-44.
39. Rummell N. XBRL: IR. Financial Week 2008, [October 12].
40. Schneider B., So W. XBRL: an interview with Amy Pawlicki of the AICPA (Part 1). Hitachi Data Interactive.com [July 24]. http://hitachidatainteractive.com/2009/07/24/xbrl-an-interview-with-amy-pawlicki-of-the-aicpa-part-1/.
41. SEC SEC approves interactive data for financial reporting by public companies, mutual funds - press release 2008-300 2008, Securities and Exchange Commission, Washington, D.C., [December 18].
42. Sharma D. Effects of professional and non-professional investors' perceptions of board effectiveness on their judgments: an experimental study. J Account Public Policy 2006, 25(1):91-115.
43. Smith D.B., Stettler H., Beedles W. An investigation of the information content of foreign sensitive payments disclosure. J Account Econ 1984, 6(2):153-162.
44. Thomas A. A tale of two reports. Eur Bus Forum 2003/4, 16:79-81. [Winter].
45. Troshani I., Lymer A. Translation in XBRL standardization. Inf Technol People 2010, 23(2):136-164.