Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Debiasing Scale Compatibility Effects when Investors Use Nonfinancial Measures to Screen Potential Investments*

2008; Wiley; Volume: 25; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1506/car.25.3.6

1911-3846

Kevin Jackson,

Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance

Contemporary Accounting ResearchVolume 25, Issue 3 p. 803-826 Debiasing Scale Compatibility Effects when Investors Use Nonfinancial Measures to Screen Potential Investments* Kevin E. Jackson, Kevin E. Jackson University of Illinois, Urbana-ChampaignSearch for more papers by this author Kevin E. Jackson, Kevin E. Jackson University of Illinois, Urbana-ChampaignSearch for more papers by this author First published: 15 January 2010 https://doi.org/10.1506/car.25.3.6Citations: 13 * Accepted by Laureen Maines. This paper is based on my dissertation completed at the University of Texas at Austin. I thank my dissertation chairperson, Lisa Koonce, and the other members of my dissertation committee: Susan Broniarczyk, Eric Hirst, Ross Jennings, and Karen Sedatole. I also thank Florence Atiase, Kristine Ehrich, Brooke Elliott, Annie Farrell, Jill Griffin, Julie Irwin, Steven Kachelmeier, Kathryn Kadous, Susan Krische, Marlys Lipe, Laureen Maines, Bill Mayew, Pantisa Pavabutr, Fred Phillips, Lisa Sedor, Somchai Supattarakul, Peggy Weber, Jen Winchel, and Alex Yen. I also thank anonymous reviewers, and workshop participants at the University of Texas at Austin, the University of Houston, the University of Massachusetts, and the University of Illinois for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this paper. I am grateful for financial support from the KPMG Foundation and research funding from the Business Measurement and Assurance Services Center at the University of Texas at Austin. AboutPDF 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 Bock, R., and L. Jones. 1968. The measurement and prediction of measurement and choice. San Francisco: Holden Day. Cohen, J., G. Krishnamoorthy, and A. Wright. 2000. Evidence on the effect of financial and nonfinancial trends on analytical review. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 19 (1): 27–48. Coupey, E., J. R. Irwin, and J. W. Payne. 1998. Product category familiarity and preference construction. Journal of Consumer Research 24 (4): 459–68. Dhar, R., S. M. Nowlis, and S. J. Sherman. 1999. Comparison effects on preference construction. Journal of Consumer Research 26 (3): 293–306. Dowling, G., and D. Midgley. 1991. Using rank values as an interval scale. Psychology and Marketing 8 (1): 37–41. Elliott, W. B., F. Hodge, J. Kennedy, and M. Pronk. 2007. Are MBA students a good proxy for nonprofessional investors The Accounting Review 82 (1): 139–68. Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). 2001. Business and financial reporting, challenges from the new economy, ed. W. S. Upton. Norwalk, CT: FASB. Fischer, G. W., and S. A. Hawkins. 1993. Strategy compatibility, scale compatibility, and the prominence effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology 19 (3): 580–97. Gujarati, A. 2003. Basic econometrics. New York: McGraw-Hill. Hodge, F. D. 2001. Hyperlinking unaudited information to audited financial statements: Effects on investor judgments. The Accounting Review 76 (4): 675–91. Hogarth, R. M., and H. J. Einhorn. 1992. Order effects in belief updating: The belief-adjustment model. Cognitive Psychology 24 (1): 1–55. Hsee, C. K. 1996. The evaluability hypothesis: An explanation for preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 67 (3): 247–57. Huber, J., D. Ariely, and G. Fischer. 2002. Expressing preferences in a principal-agent task: A comparison of choice, rating, and matching. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 87 (1): 66–90. Invested Interests. 2006. Introduction to socially responsible investing. http:www.investedinterests.com. Irwin, J. R., and J. H. Davis. 1995. Choice/matching preference reversals in groups: Consensus processes and justification-based reasoning. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 64 (3): 325–39. Johnson, E. J., J. W. Payne, and J. R. Bettman. 1988. Information displays and preference reversals. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 42 (1): 1–21. Joyce, E., and B. Shapiro. 1995. Invariance violations and mental accounting procedures in riskless matching. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 62 (2): 175–89. Kensinger, J. W., and J. D. Martin. 1996. Relationship investing: What active institutional investors want from management. Morristown, NJ: Financial Executive Research Foundation. Kinder, P. D. 2005. Socially responsible investing: An evolving concept in a changing world. Boston: KLD Research & Analytics. Mercer, M. A. 2004. How do investors assess the credibility of management disclosures Accounting Horizons 18 (3): 185–96. Niedrich, R., S. Subhash, and D. Wedell. 2001. Reference price and price perceptions: A comparison of alternative methods. Journal of Consumer Research 20 (3): 339–54. Russo, J. E. 1977. The value of unit-price information. Journal of Marketing Research 14 (2): 193–201. Schkade, D. A., and E. J. Johnson. 1989. Cognitive processes in preference reversals. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 44 (2): 203–31. Slovic, P., D. Griffin, and A. Tversky. 1990. Compatibility effects in judgment and choice. In Insights in Decision Making: A Tribute to Hillel J. Einhorn, ed. R. M. Hogarth, 5–27. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Slovic, P., and D. MacPhillamy. 1974. Dimensional commensurability and cue utilization in comparative judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 11 (1): 17–94. Social Investment Research Analyst Network. 2006. Socially responsible investment analysts find more large U.S. companies reporting on social and environmental issues. July, 12, 2006. http:www.siran.orgcsr.php. Tversky, A., S. Sattath, and P. Slovic. 1988. Contingent weighting in judgment and choice. Psychological Review 95 (3): 371–84. Wall Street Journal Online (WSJ Online). 2005. Corporate reputation survey. December 6, 2005. http:online.wsj.com. Wedell, D. 1995. Contrast effects in paired comparisons: Evidence for both stimulus-based and response-based processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 21 (5): 1158–73. Citing Literature Volume25, Issue3Fall 2008Pages 803-826 ReferencesRelatedInformation