Consequences of XBRL standardization on financial statement data

Journal of Information Systems

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 155-167

  Vasarhelyi, Miklos A ^a   Chan, David Y ^a   Krahel, J P ^a  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Data analysis; Financial reporting; References; XBRL

Indexed keywords

EID: 84861726847     PISSN: 08887985     EISSN: 15587959     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/isys-10258     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 2009. Performing Agreed-Upon Procedures Engagements that Address the Completeness, Accuracy, or Consistency of XBRL-Tagged Data. Statement of Position 09-1. New York, NY: AICPA.
2. Amir, E., and B. Lev. 1996. Value-relevance of nonfinancial information: The wireless communications industry. Journal of Accounting and Economics 22 (1/3): 3-30.
3. Baldwin, A. A., and B. S. Trinkle. 2011. The impact of XBRL: A Delphi investigation. The International Journal of Digital Accounting Research 11: 1-24.
4. Bao, J., G. Rong, X. Li, and L. Ding. 2010. Representing financial reports on the semantic web. In Semantic Web Rules, edited by Dean, M., J. Hall, A. Rotolo, and S. Tabet, 144-152. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer Berlin.
5. Barth, M. E., and K. Schipper. 2008. Financial reporting transparency. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance 23 (2): 173-190.
6. Bartley, J. W., Y. A. Chen, and E. Z. Taylor. 2010. A comparison of XBRL filings to corporate 10-Ks- Evidence from the voluntary filing program. Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id1/41397658
7. Behn, B. K., and R. A. Riley, Jr. 1999. Using nonfinancial information to predict financial performance: The case of the U.S. airline industry. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance 14 (1): 29-56.
8. Berners-Lee, T., and J. Hendler. 2001. Publishing on the semantic web. Nature 410: 1023-1025.
9. Blouin, M. C. 2010. What types of firms send a clear signal in the MD&A? Determinants of annual report readability. Journal of Academy of Business and Economics. Available at: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/article/Journal-Academy-Business-Economics/237533538.html
10. Bovee, M., A. Kogan, K. Nelson, R. P. Srivastava, and M. A. Vasarhelyi. 2005. Financial reporting and auditing agent with net knowledge (FRAANK) and extensible business reporting language (XBRL). Journal of Information Systems 19 (1): 19-41.
11. Bovee, M., R. P. Srivastava, and B. Mak. 2003. A conceptual framework and belief-function approach to assessing overall information quality. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 18 (1): 51-74.
12. Castells, P., B. Foncillas, R. Lara, M. Rico, and J. Alonso. 2004. Semantic web technologies for economic and financial information management. In The Semantic Web: Research and Applications, edited by Bussler, C., J. Davies, D. Fensel, and R. Studer, 473-487. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer Berlin.
13. Chakraborty, V. 2011a. Automating the Process of Taxonomy Creation and Comparison of Taxonomy Structures. Working paper, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.
14. Chakraborty, V. 2011b. Formalizing and Automating the Process of Taxonomy Creation. Doctoral Dissertation. Newark, NJ: Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.
15. Clarkson, P. M., J. L. Kao, and G. D. Richardson. 1999. Evidence that management discussion and analysis (MD&A) is a part of a firm's overall disclosure package. Contemporary Accounting Research 16 (1): 111-134.
16. Cohen, E. E., T. Schiavina, and O. Servais. 2005. XBRL: The standardised business language for 21st century reporting and governance. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance 2 (4): 368-394.
17. Davis, F. D. 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 13 (3): 319-340.
18. Debreceny, R., D. Alessandro, C. Felden, S. Farewell, and M. Piechocki. 2010a. Feeding the information value chain: Deriving analytical ratios from XBRL filings to the SEC. Available at: http://web.ku.edu/;eycarat/myssi/_pdf/2-Debreceny-XBRL%20Ratios%2020101213.pdf
19. Debreceny, R., and S. Farewell. 2010. Adios! Airways: An assignment on mapping financial statements to the U.S. GAAP XBRL taxonomy. Issues in Accounting Education 25 (3): 465-488.
20. Debreceny, R., S. Farewell, M. Piechocki, C. Felden, and A. Gräning. 2010b. Does it add up? Early evidence on the data quality of XBRL filings to the SEC. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 29 (3): 296-306.
21. Debreceny, R. S., A. Chandra, J. J. Cheh, D. Guithues-Amrhein, N. J. Hannon, P. D. Hutchison, D. Janvrin, R. A. Jones, B. Lamberton, A. Lymer, M. Mascha, R. Nehmer, S. Roohani, R. P. Srivastava, S. Trabelsi, T. Tribunella, G. Trites, and M. A. Vasarhelyi. 2005. Financial reporting in XBRL on the SEC's EDGAR system: A critique and evaluation. Journal of Information Systems 19 (2): 191-210.
22. DeFelice, A., and M. G. Lamoreaux. 2010. No IFRS requirement until 2015 or later under new SEC timeline. Journal of Accountancy. Available at: http://www.journalofaccountancy.com/Web/20102656.htm
23. Deloitte. 2009. XBRL: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Available at: http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-UnitedStates/Local%20Assets/Documents/AERS/us_aers_xbrlfaq_090109.pdf
24. Demski, J. 1972a. Information improvement bounds. Journal of Accounting Research 10 (1): 58-76.
25. Demski, J. 1972b. Optimal performance measurement. Journal of Accounting Research 10 (2): 243-258.
26. Demski, J. S. 1972c. Information Analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Pub.
27. Du, H., M. A. Vasarhelyi, and X. Zheng. 2011. XBRL mandate: Thousands of filing errors and so what? Available at: http://web.ku.edu/;eycarat/myssi/_pdf/3-Du%20et%20al.%20XBRL%20Mandate.pdf
28. e: solutions Group. 2008. Global Financials: European, Latin American, and Asian Challenges. Available at: http://www.esolutionsgroup.com/PDFs/Global%20Financials%20-%20Europe%20SE%20Asia%20and%20Americas.pdf
29. Feltham, G. A. 1972. Information Evaluation. Sarasota, FL: American Accounting Association.
30. Feltham, G. A., and J. S. Demski. 1970. The use of models in information evaluation. The Accounting Review 45 (4): 623-640.
31. Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). 2006. Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting: Objective of Financial Reporting and Qualitative Characteristics of Decision-Useful Financial Reporting Information. Financial Accounting Series. Norwalk, CT: FASB.
32. Gefen, D., E. Karahanna, and D. W. Straub. 2003. Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly 27 (1): 51-90.
33. Gunn, J. 2007. XBRL: Opportunities and challenges in enhancing financial reporting and assurance processes. Current Issues in Auditing 1 (1): A36-A43.
34. Hirshleifer, D., and S. H. Teoh. 2003. Limited attention, information disclosure, and financial reporting. Journal of Accounting and Economics 36 (1/3): 337-386.
35. Hodge, F. D., J. J. Kennedy, and L. A. Maines. 2004. Does search-facilitating technology improve the transparency of financial reporting? The Accounting Review 79 (3): 687-703.
36. Hsu, C-L., and H-P. Lu. 2004. Why do people play on-line games? An extended TAM with social influences and flow experience. Information and Management 41 (7): 853-868.
37. Hu, P. J., P. Y. K. Chau, O. R. Liu Sheng, and T. Kar Yan. 1999. Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology. Journal of Management Information Systems 16 (2): 91-112.
38. Igbaria, M., N. Zinatelli, P. Cragg, and A. L. M. Cavaye. 1997. Personal computing acceptance factors in small firms: A structural equation model. MIS Quarterly 21 (3): 279-305.
39. Ittner, C. D., and D. F. Larcker. 1998. Are nonfinancial measures leading indicators of financial performance? An analysis of customer satisfaction. Journal of Accounting Research 36 (3): 1-35.
40. Janvrin, D. J., R. E. Pinsker, and M. Mascha. 2011. XBRL, Excel or PDF? The Effects of Technology Choice on the Analysis of Financial Information. Working paper, Iowa State University.
41. Kahneman, D. 1973. Attention and Effort. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
42. Krahel, J. P. 2011. Formalization of Accounting Standards. Doctoral Dissertation. Newark, NJ: Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.
43. Lara, R., I. Cantador, and P. Castells. 2006. XBRL taxonomies and OWL ontologies for investment funds. In Advances in Conceptual Modeling-Theory and Practice, edited by Roddick, J., V. Benjamins, S. Si-said Cherfi, R. Chiang, C. Claramunt, R. Elmasri, F. Grandi, H. Han, M. Hepp, M. Lytras, V. Mǐsic, G. Poels, I-Y. Song, J. Trujillo, and C. Vangenot, 271-280. Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
44. Marschak, J., and R. Radner. 1972. Economic Theory of Teams. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
45. Méndez, S., J. Labra, J. Andrés, and O. Patricia. 2009. Analysis of XBRL documents containing accounting information of listed firms using semantic web technologies. In Metadata and Semantics, edited by Sicilia, M-A., and M. D. Lytras, 375-381. New York, NY: Springer.
46. Núñnez, S., J. de Andrés Suárez, J. Gayo, and P. de Pablos, 2008. A semantic based collaborative system for the interoperability of XBRL accounting information. In Emerging Technologies and Information Systems for the Knowledge Society, edited by Lytras, M., J. Carroll, E. Damiani, and R. Tennyson, 593-599. Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
47. Pavlou, P. A. 2003. Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 7 (3): 101-134.
48. Plumlee, R. D., and M. A. Plumlee. 2008. Assurance on XBRL for financial reporting. Accounting Horizons 22 (3): 353-368.
49. QAD. 2008. Training Guide: Financial Management. Available at: http://resources2.know.qad.com/books/financial_management_tg_book-20080512-133039/publications/pdf-trainingguide/output/book.pdf
50. Roberts, D. 2008. XBRL will be audited. RAAS Consulting Ltd. Available at: http://raasconsulting.com/XBRL_will_be_audited.aspx
51. Rogers, E. M. 1983. Diffusion of Innovations. New York, NY: The Free Press.
52. Roohani, S., Y. Furusho, and M. Koizumi. 2009. XBRL: Improving transparency and monitoring functions of corporate governance. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance 6 (4): 355-369.
53. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 2009. 17 CFR Parts 229, 230, 232, 239, 240 and 249. [Release Nos. 33-9002; 34-59324; 39-2461; IC-28609; File No. S7-11-08.] RIN 3235-AJ71. Interactive Data to Improve Financial Reporting. Available at: http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/2009/33-9002.pdf
54. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 2011. The Laws that Govern the Securities Industry. Available at: http://www.sec.gov/about/laws.shtml
55. Srivastava, R. P., and A. Kogan. 2010. Assurance on XBRL instance document: A conceptual framework of assertions. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 11 (3): 261-273.
56. Suzuki, Y., and L. R. Williams. 1998. Analysis of EDI resistance behavior. Transportation Journal 37 (4): 36-44.
57. Thomson Reuters. 2008. Companion to PPC's Guide to Preparing Financial Statements. New York, NY: Thomson Reuters.
58. Vasarhelyi, M. A., and M. G. Alles. 2010. A roadmap for XBRL tagging and five axioms on its intended and unintended consequences. In XBRL e Informativa Aziendale. Traiettorie, Innovazioni e Sfide. Milan, Italy: Franco Angeli.
59. Vasarhelyi, M. A., M. G. Alles, and J. P. Krahel. 2010. Five Axioms on the Consequences of XBRL Tagging of Financial Information. Working paper, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.
60. XBRL International Standards Board (XSB). 2010. Preserve. Promote. Participate. Moving XBRL Forward. Available at: http://www.xbrl.org/2010Initiatives/XBRL2010Initiatives.pdf