IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Users’ Perception On Cash Flow Reporting Practices In Mauritius

Listed author(s):
  • RAMLUGUN Vidisha Gunesh

    (University of Mauritius)

  • HOSANEE Priscille

    (University of Mauritius)

Registered author(s):

    The IASB and the FASB are currently proposing that cash flow statements under the direct method be mandatory for all firms under the harmonized cash flow reporting requirements. The study investigates which cash flow reporting method is perceived as being more useful among users in Mauritius. The aim is to assess whether the direct method will favorably be integrated in reporting practices of Mauritian companies. A questionnaire was developed and surveyed for data collection. Findings reveal that users have a preference for the direct cash flow reporting method as far as relevance, reliability and decision usefulness are concerned. But we report a weak mean difference among them. In addition, as far as understandability is concerned, results suggest that users prefer the indirect method. This paper purports to contribute towards the on-going debate about which cash flow reporting method is more useful.

    If 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.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences in its journal Studies in Business and Economics.

    Volume (Year): 9 (2014)
    Issue (Month): 3 (December)
    Pages: 82-96

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:blg:journl:v:9:y:2014:i:3:p:82-96
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences Dumbravii Avenue, No 17, postal code 550324, Sibiu, Romania

    Phone: 004 0269 210375
    Fax: 004 0269 210375
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:blg:journl:v:9:y:2014:i:3:p:82-96. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Mihaela Herciu)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.