IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v13y1996i2p527-567.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effects of Cross†Sectional Scale Differences on Regression Results in Empirical Accounting Research

Author

Listed:
  • MARY E. BARTH
  • SANJAY KALLAPUR

Abstract

. This study investigates coefficient bias and heteroscedasticity resulting from scale differences in accounting levels†based research designs analytically and using simulations based on accounting data. Findings indicate that including a scale proxy as an independent variable is more effective than deflation at mitigating coefficient bias, even if the proxy is 95 percent correlated with the true scale factor. In fact, deflation can worsen coefficient bias. Also, deflation often does not noticeably reduce heteroscedasticity and can decrease estimation efficiency. White (1980) standard errors are close to the true ones in regressions using undeflated variables. Replications of specifications in three recent accounting studies confirm the simulation findings. The findings suggest that when scale differences are of concern, accounting researchers should include a scale proxy as an independent variable and report inferences based on White standard errors. Résumé. Les auteurs examinent, tant sur le plan analytique qu'au moyen de simulations basées sur les données comptables, la distorsion des coefficients et l'hétéroscédasticité résultant des différences d'échelle dans les plans de recherche comptable basés sur les niveaux. Leurs constatations révèlent que l'inclusion d'un substitut d'échelle à titre de variable indépendante est plus efficace que la déflation pour atténuer la distorsion relative au coefficient, même si le substitut présente une corrélation de 95 pour cent avec le véritable facteur d'échelle. En fait, la déflation peut accentuer la distorsion relative au coefficient. Aussi, il arrive souvent que la déflation, sans réduire de façon appréciable l'hétéroscédasticité, puisse diminuer l'efficience de l'estimation. Les erreurs†types de White (1980) se rapprochent des erreurs véritables dans les régressions faisant appel à des variables non déflatées. La répétition des mêmes caractéristiques dans trois études comptables récentes confirme les résultats de la simulation. Les conclusions de l'étude donnent à penser que lorsque les différences d'échelle sont sujet de préoccupation, les chercheurs en comptabilité devraient faire intervenir un substitut d'échelle à titre de variable indépendante et formuler les inférences à partir des erreurs†types de White.

Suggested Citation

  • Mary E. Barth & Sanjay Kallapur, 1996. "The Effects of Cross†Sectional Scale Differences on Regression Results in Empirical Accounting Research," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(2), pages 527-567, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:13:y:1996:i:2:p:527-567
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1911-3846.1996.tb00514.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1996.tb00514.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1996.tb00514.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. Griliches, Zvi & Hausman, Jerry A., 1986. "Errors in variables in panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 93-118, February.
    2. Bernard, Vl, 1987. "Cross-Sectional Dependence And Problems In Inference In Market-Based Accounting Research," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 1-48.
    3. Christie, Andrew A., 1987. "On cross-sectional analysis in accounting research," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 231-258, December.
    4. Barth, Me & Mcnichols, Mf, 1994. "Estimation And Market Valuation Of Environmental Liabilities Relating To Superfund Sites," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32, pages 177-209.
    5. Kothari, S. P. & Zimmerman, Jerold L., 1995. "Price and return models," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 155-192, September.
    6. Kormendi, Roger & Lipe, Robert, 1987. "Earnings Innovations, Earnings Persistence, and Stock Returns," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 60(3), pages 323-345, July.
    7. Lustgarten, Steven, 1982. "The impact of replacement cost disclosure on security prices : New Evidence," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 121-141, October.
    8. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
    9. Chesher, Andrew & Jewitt, Ian, 1987. "The Bias of a Heteroskedasticity Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(5), pages 1217-1222, September.
    10. Magliolo, J, 1986. "Capital-Market Analysis Of Reserve Recognition Accounting," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24, pages 69-108.
    11. Olsen, C, 1985. "Valuation Implications Of Sfas No 33 Data For Electric Utility Investors," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23, pages 28-47.
    12. Beaver, W & Eger, C & Ryan, S & Wolfson, M, 1989. "Financial-Reporting, Supplemental Disclosures, And Bank Share Prices," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 157-178.
    13. Lev, Baruch & Sunder, Shyam, 1979. "Methodological issues in the use of financial ratios," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 187-210, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Mary E. Barth & Greg Clinch, 2009. "Scale Effects in Capital Markets-Based Accounting Research," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3-4), pages 253-288.
    2. Kothari, S. P., 2001. "Capital markets research in accounting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1-3), pages 105-231, September.
    3. Kothari, S. P. & Zimmerman, Jerold L., 1995. "Price and return models," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 155-192, September.
    4. Irena Jindrichovska, 2001. "The relationship between accounting numbers and returns: some empirical evidence from the emerging market of the Czech Republic," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(1), pages 107-131.
    5. Mary E. Barth & Greg Clinch, 2009. "Scale Effects in Capital Markets‐Based Accounting Research," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3‐4), pages 253-288, April.
    6. Begona Giner & Carmelo Reverte, 2001. "Valuation implications of capital structure: a contextual approach," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 291-314.
    7. Lipe, Robert C. & Bryant, Lisa & Widener, Sally K., 1998. "Do nonlinearity, firm-specific coefficients, and losses represent distinct factors in the relation between stock returns and accounting earnings?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 195-214, May.
    8. Core, John E. & Schrand, Catherine M., 1999. "The effect of accounting-based debt covenants on equity valuation1," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 1-34, February.
    9. Nasser A. Spear, 1994. "The Stock Market Reaction to the Reserve Quantity Disclosures of U.S. Oil and Gas Producers," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 381-404, June.
    10. Thomas Schleicher & Martin Walker, 1999. "Share price anticipation of earnings and management's discussion of operations and financing," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(4), pages 321-335.
    11. Harris, Mary S. & Muller III, Karl A., 1999. "The market valuation of IAS versus US-GAAP accounting measures using Form 20-F reconciliations1," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(1-3), pages 285-312, January.
    12. Fargher, Neil & Wee, Marvin, 2019. "The impact of Ball and Brown (1968) on generations of research," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 55-72.
    13. Terry Shevlin & D. Shores, 1993. "Firm Size, Security Returns, and Unexpected Earnings: The Anomalous Signed†Size Effect," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(1), pages 1-30, September.
    14. Emeka T. Nwaeze, 2000. "Positive and Negative Earnings Surprises, Regulatory Climate, and Stock Returns," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 107-134, March.
    15. Al-Tuwaijri, Sulaiman A. & Christensen, Theodore E. & Hughes, K. II, 2004. "The relations among environmental disclosure, environmental performance, and economic performance: a simultaneous equations approach," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(5-6), pages 447-471.
    16. Mohamed Sellami, 2006. "Typologie des déterminants comptables de la valeur : Apports de l'approche économique de l'information dans la mesure de la valeur," Post-Print halshs-00558252, HAL.
    17. Keating, Elizabeth K. & Lys, Thomas Z. & Magee, Robert P., 2003. "Internet downturn: finding valuation factors in Spring 2000," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1-3), pages 189-236, January.
    18. Barth, Mary E. & Beaver, William H. & Landsman, Wayne R., 2001. "The relevance of the value relevance literature for financial accounting standard setting: another view," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1-3), pages 77-104, September.
    19. Emeka T. Nwaeze, 1998. "Regulation and the Valuation Relevance of Book Value and Earnings: Evidence from the United States," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 547-573, December.
    20. Akbar, Saeed & Shah, Syed Zulfiqar Ali & Stark, Andrew W., 2011. "The value relevance of cash flows, current accruals, and non-current accruals in the UK," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 311-319.

    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:2:p:527-567. 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.