The Impact of Risk Report Formats on Investment Analyst Decisions: An Experimental Case from Indonesia
AbstractThis study aims to examine the impact on investment decisions of risk information reported by banking companies in Indonesia pursuant to Indonesia SFAS 60, adopted from IFRS 7. The standard requires banking companies in Indonesia to prepare a complete report (qualitative and quantitative) either in the format of a risk-sensitivity analysis, as a value at risk, or in a tabular format. This study was conducted utilising an on-line field experimental method with 3 Ã— 2 mixed designs that involved 54 investment analysts as participants. The experiment was conducted to test whether different formats of risk information influence the investment decision-making process. The results showed that participants have confidence in making investments when the risk information presented is in a complete risk format. This is shown by a positive and significant increase in confidence when participants analyse the complete risk information compared to risk information that is presented in a qualitative form only. The findings also showed a difference when risk information is presented in a tabular format compared to risk information presented in a sensitivity analysis or a value at risk format. Most participants chose the tabular format because it is considered more informative and thought to improve the reasoning of the investment analysis.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia in its journal Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance.
Volume (Year): 9 (2013)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Indonesia SFAS 60; risk information; sensitivity analysis; value at risk; tabular format;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Glenn Harrison & John List, 2004.
Artefactual Field Experiments
00058, The Field Experiments Website.
- Brown Kruse, Jamie & Thompson, Mark A., 2001. "A comparison of salient rewards in experiments: money and class points," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 113-117, December.
- Mary E. Barth & Greg Clinch & Toshi Shibano, 2003. "Market Effects of Recognition and Disclosure," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 581-609, 09.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Journal Division).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.