IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/aaajpp/v27y2014i1p183-208.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Traditional and alternative methods of measuring the understandability of accounting narratives

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Jones
  • Malcolm Smith

Abstract

Purpose - – The study aims to explore the use of alternative measures of “understandability” on accounting texts. This includes the meaning identification test (MIT) and the sentence verification technique (SVT), which have not previously been used by accounting researchers, as well as variants on the traditional Cloze tests such as the C-Test. Design/methodology/approach - – This study focuses on the understandability of accounting texts and evaluates how reliable the Cloze test is as a measure of comprehension. An experiment was designed and conducted to measure users' performance with a variety of comprehension measures (MIT, SVT, Cloze, C-Test). Findings - – The study concludes that the outcomes from the MIT and SVT comprehension tests are not significantly associated with those from the Cloze tests. This implies that while the Cloze test is a good measure of the predictability of accounting narratives, and of textual redundancy, it does not necessarily measure the understandability of the text. Originality/value - – These measures of understandability, which have not previously been used in accounting, would enable researchers to test the communicational effectiveness of using different accounting narratives such as annual reports or prospectuses. Such a measure could be used to improve the understandability of accounting narratives. The strengths and weaknesses of the various tests are assessed. It is suggested that there is a need for further experimentation especially with the MIT test.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Jones & Malcolm Smith, 2014. "Traditional and alternative methods of measuring the understandability of accounting narratives," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 27(1), pages 183-208, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:v:27:y:2014:i:1:p:183-208
    DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-04-2013-1314
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2013-1314/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2013-1314/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2013-1314?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Janse van Rensburg, Cecile & Coetzee, Stephen A. & Schmulian, Astrid, 2014. "South African financial reporting students' reading comprehension of the IASB Conceptual Framework," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 1-15.
    2. Andersson, Patric & Hellman, Niclas, 2020. "Analysts’ evaluations of acquisitions: Swedish survey evidence on IFRS knowledge and the use of accounting information for valuation purposes," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    3. Bernhard Stellner, 2022. "Readability of Annual Reports on the Vienna Stock Exchange: A Test of Management Obfuscation Hypothesis," Central European Business Review, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2022(5), pages 49-66.
    4. Efrim Boritz, J. & Hayes, Louise & Timoshenko, Lev M., 2020. "How understandable are SOX 404 auditors reports?," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    5. Janice Hollindale & Pamela Kent & James Routledge & Larelle Chapple, 2019. "Women on boards and greenhouse gas emission disclosures," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 59(1), pages 277-308, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:v:27:y:2014:i:1:p:183-208. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.