IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijaape/v9y2013i3p247-267.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Empirical evidence from an inter-industry descriptive analysis of overall materiality measures

Author

Listed:
  • Nicola Pecchiari
  • Craig Emby
  • Guiseppe Pogliani

Abstract

This study presents an empirical cross-industry descriptive analysis of overall quantitative materiality measures. We examine the behaviour of four commonly used quantitative materiality measures within and across industries with respect to their size, relative size and stability, over ten years. The sample consists of large- and medium-sized European companies, representing 24 different industry categories for the years 1998 through 2007 (a total sample of over 36,000 data points). Our results show that these four materiality measures are variable with respect to size and stability over time, both across industries and to a lesser extent within industries. There are similarities to, and differences from, the results of US-based research two decades earlier. Our results suggest that fruitful avenues for future research may exist both cross-sectionally and longitudinally-cross-sectionally, in investigating the relationship between industry membership, characteristic business processes in a specific industry, and materiality measures; longitudinally, in identifying the main drivers that contribute to the volatility of these materiality measures over a period of time.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicola Pecchiari & Craig Emby & Guiseppe Pogliani, 2013. "Empirical evidence from an inter-industry descriptive analysis of overall materiality measures," International Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Performance Evaluation, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 9(3), pages 247-267.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijaape:v:9:y:2013:i:3:p:247-267
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=55896
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    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:ids:ijaape:v:9:y:2013:i:3:p:247-267. 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=41 .

    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.