IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v13y1996i1p339-351.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Value of Experimental Methods for Practice†Relevant Accounting Research

Author

Listed:
  • LINDA S. McDANIEL
  • JOHN R. M. HAND

Abstract

. In this paper we outline three ways that experimental methods can add value to academic accounting research, practice, and particularly standard setters such as the Accounting Standards Board (AcSB), the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), and the International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC). Through examples, we illustrate that, compared to archival methods, experimental methods can have three advantages in supplying evidence on questions that are important and relevant to financial accounting prescriptions. These advantages are timeliness, inclusiveness, and causality. First, experimental methods can be more timely in that experiments can be designed to provide evidence on an ex ante basis. This advantage particularly applies when there are no relevant archival data available and/or no close historical substitutes for a proposed accounting standard. Second, experiments can be more inclusive. They can test a spectrum of standard†setting solutions that the archival approach precludes for lack of available data. Finally, experimental methods can powerfully isolate and measure the direction and strength of cause†effect relations. In their decision making, standard setters require knowledge on the nature and cause of intended and unintended consequences of proposed and already promulgated standards. Therefore, cause†effect evidence is a critical and valuable input to their deliberations. Résumé. Les auteurs décrivent trois façons d'augmenter, grâce aux méthodes expérimentales, la qualité de la recherche universitaire en comptabilité, de l'exercice de la profession comptable et, en particulier, du travail de normalisation comptable auquel se livrent des organismes comme l'Accounting Standards Board (AcSB), le Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) et l'International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC). Par des exemples, les auteurs illustrent le fait que les méthodes expérimentales peuvent présenter trois avantages, par rapport aux méthodes d'archivage, dans la documentation des questions d'importance pertinentes aux normes de comptabilité financière: la rapidité, l'intégralité et la causalité. En effet, les méthodes expérimentales peuvent être, en premier lieu, plus rapides, du fait qu'il est possible de concevoir les expériences de manière à obtenir des preuves documentaires sur une base ex ante. Cet avantage se concrétise particulièrement lorsqu'il n'existe pas de données d'archives pertinentes disponibles et (ou) aucun proche substitut de données historiques relativement à une norme comptable proposée. En deuxième lieu, les méthodes expérimentales peuvent être plus englobantes. Elles permettent parfois de vérifier un éventail de solutions, en ce qui a trait aux normes, que la méthode des données d'archives ne permet pas de vérifier en raison de l'insuffisance des données disponibles. En dernier lieu, les méthodes expérimentales permettent d'isoler et de mesurer clairement l'orientation et l'intensité des relations de cause à effet. Dans leurs décisions, les responsables de la normalisation doivent disposer de renseignements sur la nature et la cause des conséquences prévues et imprévues des normes proposées et déjà promulguées. C'est pourquoi la documentation relative à la causalité est d'un apport déterminant et précieux dans leurs délibérations.

Suggested Citation

  • LINDA S. McDANIEL & JOHN R. M. HAND, 1996. "The Value of Experimental Methods for Practice†Relevant Accounting Research," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(1), pages 339-351, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:13:y:1996:i:1:p:339-351
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1911-3846.1996.tb00504.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1996.tb00504.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1996.tb00504.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernard, Victor L. & Thomas, Jacob K., 1990. "Evidence that stock prices do not fully reflect the implications of current earnings for future earnings," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 305-340, December.
    2. Joos, P & Lang, M, 1994. "The Effects Of Accounting Diversity - Evidence From The European-Union," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32, pages 141-168.
    3. Bernard, Vl & Thomas, Jk, 1989. "Post-Earnings-Announcement Drift - Delayed Price Response Or Risk Premium," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27, pages 1-36.
    4. Haim Falk, 1994. "International Accounting: A Quest for Research," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 595-615, June.
    5. Huddart, Steven, 1994. "Employee stock options," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 207-231, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Julia Baldauf & Marcel Steller & Rudolf Steckel, 2015. "The Influence of Audit Risk and Materiality Guidelines on Auditors’ Planning Materiality Assessment," Accounting and Finance Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 4(4), pages 1-97, November.
    2. Koonce, Lisa & Mongold, Cassie & Quaid, Laura & White, Brian J., 2024. "Experimental research on standard-setting issues in financial reporting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    3. Martin, Rachel, 2019. "Examination and implications of experimental research on investor perceptions," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 145-169.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dichev, Ilia D. & Qian, Jingyi, 2022. "The benefits of transaction-level data: The case of NielsenIQ scanner data," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1).
    2. AltInkIlIç, Oya & Hansen, Robert S., 2009. "On the information role of stock recommendation revisions," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 17-36, October.
    3. Yun Meng & Christos Pantzalis, 2021. "Lottery-type stocks and corporate strategies at the turn of the month," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1027-1055, April.
    4. Hui, Kai Wai & Nelson, Karen K. & Yeung, P. Eric, 2016. "On the persistence and pricing of industry-wide and firm-specific earnings, cash flows, and accruals," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 185-202.
    5. Tuomo Vuolteenaho, 2002. "What Drives Firm‐Level Stock Returns?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(1), pages 233-264, February.
    6. Wang, Weimin & (Frank) Wang, Xu, 2014. "Predicting earnings in a poor information environment," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 46-58.
    7. Abdul Hamid Habbe, 2017. "Estimation Error of Earnings Information: A Test of Representativeness and Anchoring-adjustment Heuristic," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 7(1), pages 224-233.
    8. Zhu, Hui, 2014. "Implications of limited investor attention to customer–supplier information transfers," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 405-416.
    9. Paul Docherty & Steve Easton, 2012. "Market efficiency and continuous information arrival: evidence from prediction markets," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(19), pages 2461-2471, July.
    10. Lin, Hai & Tao, Xinyuan & Wu, Chunchi, 2022. "Forecasting earnings with combination of analyst forecasts," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 133-159.
    11. Ball, Ray & Bartov, Eli, 1996. "How naive is the stock market's use of earnings information?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 319-337, June.
    12. P. Barrett Wheeler, 2021. "Unrecognized Expected Credit Losses and Bank Share Prices," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 805-866, June.
    13. Vinay Patel, 2015. "Price Discovery in US and Australian Stock and Options Markets," PhD Thesis, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney, number 27, July-Dece.
    14. Jonathan A. Milian, 2015. "Unsophisticated Arbitrageurs and Market Efficiency: Overreacting to a History of Underreaction?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(1), pages 175-220, March.
    15. S. Price & Dean Gatzlaff & C. Sirmans, 2012. "Information Uncertainty and the Post-Earnings-Announcement Drift Anomaly: Insights from REITs," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 250-274, January.
    16. Lin, Chaonan & Ko, Kuan-Cheng & Chen, Yu-Lin & Chu, Hsiang-Hui, 2016. "Information discreteness, price limits and earnings momentum," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-22.
    17. Guanming He, 2021. "Credit rating, post‐earnings‐announcement drift, and arbitrage from transient institutions," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(7-8), pages 1434-1467, July.
    18. Bebchuk, Lucian A. & Cohen, Alma & Wang, Charles C.Y., 2013. "Learning and the disappearing association between governance and returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 323-348.
    19. Baik, Bok & Kang, Hyoung-Goo & Kim, Young Jun, 2013. "Volatility arbitrage around earnings announcements: Evidence from the Korean equity linked warrants market," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 109-130.
    20. Ruben M.T. Peixinho & Richard J. Taffler, 2011. "Are analysts misleading investors? The case of goingconcern opinions," CEFAGE-UE Working Papers 2011_22, University of Evora, CEFAGE-UE (Portugal).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:coacre:v:13:y:1996:i:1:p:339-351. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    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.