IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/esprep/306142.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Cross-Modality Anchoring Bias as a Possible Cognitive Explanation for the Discretionary Accruals Anomaly

Author

Listed:
  • Barak, Ronen E.
  • Aharon, Itzhak
  • Hatzor, Limor

Abstract

The accruals anomaly, a well-documented financial phenomenon lacking a comprehensive scientific explanation, is addressed in this study through the proposition of a novel behavioral theory. The theory centers around the concept of a cross-modality anchoring bias, wherein the mental anchor is the magnitude of operating income, modified by the intensity of discretionary accounting accruals. This anchoring effect distorts the distribution of future cash flows used in valuation processes, potentially explaining the anomaly's persistence and robustness. To test this theory, an experiment was conducted, involving participants with suitable financial knowledge and varying levels of practical experience. The experimental results support the presence of the cross-modality anchoring effect, as estimated future cash flows differed significantly across accruals categories, despite being drawn from the same distribution. The magnitude of the bias was influenced by the level of practical financial experience and gender, with women exhibiting lower susceptibility to the interdimensional anchor.

Suggested Citation

  • Barak, Ronen E. & Aharon, Itzhak & Hatzor, Limor, 2023. "A Cross-Modality Anchoring Bias as a Possible Cognitive Explanation for the Discretionary Accruals Anomaly," EconStor Preprints 306142, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:esprep:306142
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/306142/1/Cross-Modality-Anchoring-Bias.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Allen, Eric J. & Larson, Chad R. & Sloan, Richard G., 2013. "Accrual reversals, earnings and stock returns," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 113-129.
    2. Khan, Mozaffar, 2008. "Are accruals mispriced Evidence from tests of an Intertemporal Capital Asset Pricing Model," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 55-77, March.
    3. Avramov, Doron & Chordia, Tarun & Jostova, Gergana & Philipov, Alexander, 2013. "Anomalies and financial distress," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 139-159.
    4. Baruch Lev & Doron Nissim, 2006. "The Persistence of the Accruals Anomaly," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(1), pages 193-226, March.
    5. Oechssler, Jörg & Roider, Andreas & Schmitz, Patrick W., 2009. "Cognitive abilities and behavioral biases," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 147-152, October.
    6. Konan Chan & Louis K. C. Chan & Narasimhan Jegadeesh & Josef Lakonishok, 2006. "Earnings Quality and Stock Returns," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 79(3), pages 1041-1082, May.
    7. Dan Ariely & George Loewenstein & Drazen Prelec, 2003. ""Coherent Arbitrariness": Stable Demand Curves Without Stable Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(1), pages 73-106.
    8. Fama, Eugene F, 1970. "Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 25(2), pages 383-417, May.
    9. Bergman, Oscar & Ellingsen, Tore & Johannesson, Magnus & Svensson, Cicek, 2010. "Anchoring and cognitive ability," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 107(1), pages 66-68, April.
    10. Daniel, Naveen D. & Denis, David J. & Naveen, Lalitha, 2008. "Do firms manage earnings to meet dividend thresholds," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 2-26, March.
    11. Andrey Kudryavtsev & Gil Cohen, 2011. "Behavioral Biases in Economic and Financial Knowledge: Are They the Same for Men and Women?," Advances in Management and Applied Economics, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 1(1), pages 1-2.
    12. David Hirshleifer & Kewei Hou & Siew Hong Teoh, 2012. "The Accrual Anomaly: Risk or Mispricing?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(2), pages 320-335, February.
    13. Wang, Jianxin & Houser, Daniel & Xu, Hui, 2018. "Culture, gender and asset prices: Experimental evidence from the U.S. and China," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 253-287.
    14. Brad M. Barber & Terrance Odean, 2001. "Boys will be Boys: Gender, Overconfidence, and Common Stock Investment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(1), pages 261-292.
    15. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
    16. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 1993. "Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 3-56, February.
    17. Baruch Lev, 2018. "The deteriorating usefulness of financial report information and how to reverse it," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(5), pages 465-493, July.
    18. Jeremiah Green & John R. M. Hand & Mark T. Soliman, 2011. "Going, Going, Gone? The Apparent Demise of the Accruals Anomaly," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 797-816, May.
    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. Simlai, Prodosh E., 2016. "Time-varying risk, mispricing attributes, and the accrual premium," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 150-161.
    2. Richardson, Scott & Tuna, Irem & Wysocki, Peter, 2010. "Accounting anomalies and fundamental analysis: A review of recent research advances," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2-3), pages 410-454, December.
    3. Doukakis, Leonidas C. & Papanastasopoulos, Georgios A., 2014. "The accrual anomaly in the U.K. stock market: Implications of growth and accounting distortions," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 256-277.
    4. Gray, Philip & Liao, Iris Siyu & Strydom, Maria, 2018. "The profitability of trading NOA and accruals: One effect or two?," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 211-224.
    5. Konan Chan & John W. Cooney & Joonghyuk Kim & Ajai K. Singh, 2008. "The IPO Derby: Are There Consistent Losers and Winners on This Track?," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 37(1), pages 45-79, March.
    6. Nguyet T. M. Nguyen & Abdullah Iqbal & Radha K. Shiwakoti, 2022. "The context of earnings management and its ability to predict future stock returns," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 59(1), pages 123-169, July.
    7. Lorenzo Esposito & Lorenzo Marrese, 2021. "The impact of cognitive skills on investment decisions. An empirical assessment and policy suggestions," DISCE - Quaderni del Dipartimento di Politica Economica dipe0019, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimenti e Istituti di Scienze Economiche (DISCE).
    8. Nicolas Eber & Patrick Roger & Tristan Roger, 2024. "Finance and intelligence: An overview of the literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 503-554, April.
    9. Chichernea, Doina C. & Holder, Anthony D. & Petkevich, Alex, 2015. "Does return dispersion explain the accrual and investment anomalies?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 133-148.
    10. Goto, Shingo & Xiao, Gang & Xu, Yan, 2015. "As told by the supplier: Trade credit and the cross section of stock returns," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 296-309.
    11. Mohanram, Partha & Rajgopal, Shiva, 2009. "Is PIN priced risk?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 226-243, June.
    12. Artikis, Panagiotis G. & Papanastasopoulos, Georgios A., 2016. "Implications of the cash component of earnings for earnings persistence and stock returns," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 117-133.
    13. Andrew Detzel & Philipp Schaberl & Jack Strauss, 2018. "There are two very different accruals anomalies," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 24(4), pages 581-609, September.
    14. Ashiq Ali & Xuanjuan Chen & Tong Yao & Tong Yu, 2008. "Do Mutual Funds Profit from the Accruals Anomaly?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 1-26, March.
    15. Xiaoting Hao & Juwon Jang & Eunju Lee, 2020. "High accruals momentum," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 60(4), pages 3647-3679, December.
    16. Georgios A. Papanastasopoulos, 2014. "Accounting Accruals and Stock Returns: Evidence from European Equity Markets," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(4), pages 729-768, December.
    17. Chordia, Tarun & Subrahmanyam, Avanidhar & Tong, Qing, 2014. "Have capital market anomalies attenuated in the recent era of high liquidity and trading activity?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 41-58.
    18. Zhi‐an Hu & Zhuo Huang & Dawei Lin & Zhimin Qiu, 2022. "Have existing theories explained the accrual anomaly? An evaluation based on the decomposition method," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(3), pages 3645-3675, September.
    19. David R. Gallagher & Peter A. Gardner & Camille H. Schmidt & Terry S. Walter, 2014. "Portfolio Quality and Mutual Fund Performance," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 14(4), pages 485-521, December.
    20. Czerwonka Monika, 2017. "Anchoring and Overconfidence: The Influence of Culture and Cognitive Abilities," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 53(3), pages 48-66, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    accruals anomaly; anchoring bias; cross-modality anchor; valuation; accounting conventions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G41 - Financial Economics - - Behavioral Finance - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making in Financial Markets
    • G12 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Asset Pricing; Trading Volume; Bond Interest Rates
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:esprep:306142. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    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.