IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/joares/v54y2016i4p941-986.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public Information Precision and Coordination Failure: An Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • SANJAY BANERJEE
  • MICHAEL MAIER

Abstract

More precise public disclosure reduces uncertainty about economic fundamentals, but it can increase uncertainty about other agents' actions, leading to coordination failure. We conducted a laboratory experiment to study the effects of public information precision and strategic complementarity on coordination failure. Information precision is operationalized in terms of “granularity” (level of detail). We found that (1) granular public disclosure, which is disaggregated and precise, increases the likelihood of coordination failure and decreases coordination efficiency when public information is pessimistic about future economic prospects; (2) the deleterious effect of granular disclosure is stronger when strategic complementarity is high; and (3) higher levels of strategic complementarity decrease coordination efficiency. Overall, the observed likelihood of coordination failure is higher and coordination efficiency is lower than predicted by theory. Our findings have implications for the Federal Reserve's decision to publicly disclose detailed stress test results for distressed banks, and the debate on whether the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board should publicly release reports on firm‐specific quality‐control deficiencies of audit firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Sanjay Banerjee & Michael Maier, 2016. "Public Information Precision and Coordination Failure: An Experiment," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 941-986, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:joares:v:54:y:2016:i:4:p:941-986
    DOI: 10.1111/1475-679X.12124
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679X.12124
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1475-679X.12124?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. Camille Cornand & Frank Heinemann, 2014. "Measuring agents’ reaction to private and public information in games with strategic complementarities," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(1), pages 61-77, March.
    2. Camille Cornand, 2006. "Speculative Attacks and Informational Structure: an Experimental Study," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(5), pages 797-817, November.
    3. Peter Ockenfels & Rosemarie Nagel & Frank Heinemann, 2002. "Speculative Attacks and Financial Architecture: Experimental Analysis of Coordination Games with Public and Private Information," FMG Discussion Papers dp416, Financial Markets Group.
    4. Xavier Vives, 2014. "Strategic Complementarity, Fragility, and Regulation," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 27(12), pages 3547-3592.
    5. Romain Baeriswyl & Camille Cornand, 2014. "Reducing Overreaction To Central Banks' Disclosures: Theory And Experiment," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 1087-1126, August.
    6. Baiman, S, 1975. "Evaluation And Choice Of Internal Information-Systems Within A Multiperson World," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15.
    7. Cooper, Russell, et al, 1990. "Selection Criteria in Coordination Games: Some Experimental Results," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 218-233, March.
    8. Jeremy Bertomeu & Edwige Cheynel, 2015. "Asset Measurement in Imperfect Credit Markets," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(5), pages 965-984, December.
    9. Frank Gigler & Chandra Kanodia & Haresh Sapra & Raghu Venugopalan, 2014. "How Frequent Financial Reporting Can Cause Managerial Short‐Termism: An Analysis of the Costs and Benefits of Increasing Reporting Frequency," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 357-387, May.
    10. Morris, Stephen & Shin, Hyun Song, 2004. "Coordination risk and the price of debt," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 133-153, February.
    11. Chandra Kanodia & Haresh Sapra, 2016. "A Real Effects Perspective to Accounting Measurement and Disclosure: Implications and Insights for Future Research," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 623-676, May.
    12. Haresh Sapra, 2002. "Do Mandatory Hedge Disclosures Discourage or Encourage Excessive Speculation?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(3), pages 933-964, June.
    13. Chandra Kanodia & Rajdeep Singh & Andrew E. Spero, 2005. "Imprecision in Accounting Measurement: Can It Be Value Enhancing?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 487-519, June.
    14. Steven T. Anderson & Daniel Friedman & Ryan Oprea, 2010. "Preemption Games: Theory and Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1778-1803, September.
    15. Hirshleifer, Jack, 1971. "The Private and Social Value of Information and the Reward to Inventive Activity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(4), pages 561-574, September.
    16. Regina M. Anctil & John Dickhaut & Chandra Kanodia & Brian Shapiro, 2004. "Information Transparency and Coordination Failure: Theory and Experiment," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 159-195, May.
    17. John B. Van Huyck & Raymond C. Battalio & Richard O. Beil, 1991. "Strategic Uncertainty, Equilibrium Selection, and Coordination Failure in Average Opinion Games," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(3), pages 885-910.
    18. Frank Heinemann & Rosemarie Nagel & Peter Ockenfels, 2004. "The Theory of Global Games on Test: Experimental Analysis of Coordination Games with Public and Private Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(5), pages 1583-1599, September.
    19. Wainberg, James S. & Kida, Thomas & David Piercey, M. & Smith, James F., 2013. "The impact of anecdotal data in regulatory audit firm inspection reports," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 621-636.
    20. Hong Qu, 2013. "How Do Market Prices and Cheap Talk Affect Coordination?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(5), pages 1221-1260, December.
    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. Chakravarty, Surajeet & Choo, Lawrence & Fonseca, Miguel A. & Kaplan, Todd R., 2021. "Should regulators always be transparent? a bank run experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    2. Hubert J. Kiss & Ismael Rodriguez-Lara & Alfonso Rosa-Garcia, 2022. "Experimental bank runs," Chapters, in: Sascha Füllbrunn & Ernan Haruvy (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Finance, chapter 25, pages 347-361, Edward Elgar Publishing.
      • Hubert J. Kiss & Ismael Rodriguez-Lara & Alfonso Rosa-Garcia, 2021. "Experimental Bank Runs," ThE Papers 21/03, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
    3. Moustapha Daouda Dala & Isabelle Distinguin & Alain Sauviat, 2020. "What is the information value of bank's stress tests? An investigation using banks' bond split ratings," Working Papers hal-02475512, HAL.
    4. Anna Bayona & Oana Peia & Razvan Vlahu, 2023. "Credit Ratings and Investments," Working Papers 776, DNB.
    5. Moustapha Daouda Dala & Isabelle Distinguin & Alain Sauviat, 2020. "What is the information value of bank's stress tests? An investigation using banks' bond split ratings," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 40(1), pages 485-499.

    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. Anctil, Regina M. & Dickhaut, John & Johnson, Cathleen & Kanodia, Chandra, 2010. "Does information transparency decrease coordination failure?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 228-241, November.
    2. Chakravarty, Surajeet & Choo, Lawrence & Fonseca, Miguel A. & Kaplan, Todd R., 2021. "Should regulators always be transparent? a bank run experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    3. Camille Cornand & Frank Heinemann, 2014. "Measuring agents’ reaction to private and public information in games with strategic complementarities," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(1), pages 61-77, March.
    4. Carlos Corona & Lin Nan & Gaoqing Zhang, 2019. "The Coordination Role of Stress Tests in Bank Risk‐Taking," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(5), pages 1161-1200, December.
    5. Steven J. Bosworth, 2017. "The importance of higher-order beliefs to successful coordination," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(1), pages 237-258, March.
    6. Szkup, Michal & Trevino, Isabel, 2020. "Sentiments, strategic uncertainty, and information structures in coordination games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 534-553.
    7. Romain Baeriswyl & Camille Cornand, 2014. "Reducing Overreaction To Central Banks' Disclosures: Theory And Experiment," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 1087-1126, August.
    8. Kneeland, Terri, 2016. "Coordination under limited depth of reasoning," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 49-64.
    9. Konstantinos Georgalos & Indrajit Ray & Sonali SenGupta, 2020. "Nash versus coarse correlation," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(4), pages 1178-1204, December.
    10. Helland, Leif & Iachan, Felipe S. & Juelsrud, Ragnar E. & Nenov, Plamen T., 2021. "Information quality and regime change: Evidence from the lab," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 538-554.
    11. Olga Shurchkov, 2013. "Coordination and learning in dynamic global games: experimental evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(3), pages 313-334, September.
    12. John Van Huyck & Ajalavat Viriyavipart & Alexander L. Brown, 2018. "When less information is good enough: experiments with global stag hunt games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(3), pages 527-548, September.
    13. Trabelsi, Emna & Hichri, Walid, 2021. "Central Bank Transparency with (semi-)public Information: Laboratory Experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    14. Shurchkov, Olga, 2016. "Public announcements and coordination in dynamic global games: Experimental evidence," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 20-30.
    15. Külpmann, Philipp & Khantadze, Davit, 2016. "Identifying the reasons for coordination failure in a laboratory experiment," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 567, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    16. Jinzhi Lu, 2022. "Limited Attention: Implications for Financial Reporting," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(5), pages 1991-2027, December.
    17. Hong Qu, 2013. "How Do Market Prices and Cheap Talk Affect Coordination?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(5), pages 1221-1260, December.
    18. Johne Bone & Michalis Drouvelis & Indrajit Ray, 2013. "Coordination in 2 x 2 Games by Following Recommendations from Correlated Equilibria," Discussion Papers 12-04, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham.
    19. Johne Bone & Michalis Drouvelis & Indrajit Ray, 2013. "Coordination in 2 x 2 Games by Following Recommendations from Correlated Equilibria," Discussion Papers 12-04r, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham.
    20. Georgalos, Konstantinos & Ray, Indrajit & Gupta, Sonali Sen, 2019. "Nash vs. Coarse Correlation," Cardiff Economics Working Papers E2019/3, Cardiff University, Cardiff Business School, Economics Section.

    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:bla:joares:v:54:y:2016:i:4:p:941-986. 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: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-8456 .

    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.