Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Discussion of “Does Coordinated Presentation Help Credit Analysts Identify Firm Characteristics?”

2015; Wiley; Volume: 32; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1111/1911-3846.12124

1911-3846

William Elliott,

Financial Markets and Investment Strategies

Contemporary Accounting ResearchVolume 32, Issue 2 p. 528-533 Original Article Discussion of "Does Coordinated Presentation Help Credit Analysts Identify Firm Characteristics?"† W. Brooke Elliott, W. Brooke Elliott University of Illinois at Urbana – ChampaignSearch for more papers by this author W. Brooke Elliott, W. Brooke Elliott University of Illinois at Urbana – ChampaignSearch for more papers by this author First published: 23 January 2015 https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12124Citations: 4 †Accepted by Patricia C. O'Brien. I would like to thank Steve Salterio for the opportunity to discuss this paper at the 2011 CAR Conference. I gratefully acknowledge the helpful comments and insights of Steph Grant and Brian White. Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onEmailFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat References Bloomfield, R. J. 2002. The "incomplete revelation hypothesis" and financial reporting. Accounting Horizons 16 (3): 233–43. 10.2308/acch.2002.16.3.233 Google Scholar Bloomfield, R. J., F. D. Hodge, P. E. Hopkins, and K. M. Rennekamp. 2015. Does coordinated presentation help credit analysts identify firm characteristics? Contemporary Accounting Research (this issue). Google Scholar Brewster, B. E. 2011. How a systems perspective improves knowledge acquisition and performance in analytical procedures. The Accounting Review 86 (3): 915–43. 10.2308/accr.00000040 Web of Science®Google Scholar Chen, C. X., K. Trotman, and F. H. Zhou. 2015. Nominal versus interacting electronic fraud brainstorming in hierarchical audit teams. The Accounting Review 90 (1): 175–98. 10.2308/accr-50855 Web of Science®Google Scholar Elliott, W. B., F. D. Hodge, J. J. Kennedy, and M. Pronk. 2007. Are M.B.A. students a good proxy for nonprofessional investors? The Accounting Review 82 (1): 139–68. 10.2308/accr.2007.82.1.139 Web of Science®Google Scholar Elliott, W. B., J. L. Hobson, and B. J. White. 2014. Earnings metrics, information processing, and price efficiency in laboratory markets. Working paper, University of Illinois. Google Scholar Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). 2008. Preliminary Views on Financial Statement Presentation. Norwalk, CT: FASB. Google Scholar Hirst, D. H., L. Koonce, and J. Miller. 1999. The joint effect of management's prior forecast accuracy and the form of its financial forecasts on investor judgment. Journal of Accounting Research 37 (Supplement): 101–24. 10.2307/2491347 Web of Science®Google Scholar Hodge, F., P. E. Hopkins, and D. A. Wood. 2010. The effects of financial statement information proximity and feedback on cash flow forecasts. Contemporary Accounting Research 27 (1): 101–33. 10.1111/j.1911-3846.2010.01003.x Web of Science®Google Scholar Krische, S. D. 2014. Who is the average individual investor? Numerical skills and implications for accounting research. Working paper, American University. Google Scholar Libby, R., and S. A. Emett. 2014. Earnings presentation effects on manager reporting choices and investor decisions. Accounting and Business Research 44 (4): 410–38. 10.1080/00014788.2014.906121 Web of Science®Google Scholar Libby, R., R. Bloomfield, and M. W. Nelson. 2002. Experimental research in financial accounting. Accounting, Organizations, and Society 27 (8) : 775–810. 10.1016/S0361-3682(01)00011-3 Web of Science®Google Scholar McDaniel, L. S., and J. R. M. Hand. 1996. The value of experimental methods for practice-relevant accounting research. Contemporary Accounting Research 13 (1): 339–51. 10.1111/j.1911-3846.1996.tb00504.x Google Scholar Nisbett, R., and T. Wilson. 1977. Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review 84 (3) : 231–59. 10.1037/0033-295X.84.3.231 Web of Science®Google Scholar Peecher, M. E., and I. Solomon. 2001. Theory and experimentation in studies of audit judgments and decisions: Avoiding common research traps. International Journal of Auditing 5 (3) : 193–203. 10.1111/1099-1123.00335 Google Scholar Rennekamp, K. 2012. Processing fluency and investors' reactions to disclosure readability. Journal of Accounting Research 50 (5): 1319–54. 10.1111/j.1475-679X.2012.00460.x Web of Science®Google Scholar Swieringa, R. J., and K. E. Weick. 1982. An assessment of laboratory experiments in accounting. Journal of Accounting Research 20 (Supplement): 56–101. 10.2307/2674675 Web of Science®Google Scholar Weitz, B., and P. Wright. 1979. Retrospective self-insights on factors considered in product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research 6 (3) : 280–94. 10.1086/208769 Web of Science®Google Scholar Citing Literature Volume32, Issue2Summer 2015Pages 528-533 ReferencesRelatedInformation