IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jaecon/v50y2010i2-3p287-295.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Discussion of "Implications for GAAP from an analysis of positive research in accounting"

Author

Listed:
  • Lambert, Richard

Abstract

This paper discusses the paper "Implications for GAAP from an Analysis of Positive Research in Accounting," by Kothari, Ramanna, and Skinner (in press). I discuss the role that information can play in efficiently allocating capital in the economy, and I argue that the GAAP is not primarily designed with the objective of addressing "control" issues, i.e., resolving contracting problems between shareholders and managers or between shareholders and bondholders. I also discuss the impact that conservatism has on the properties of accounting numbers, and on how it affects the usefulness of these numbers in managerial incentive contracts and in contracts with bondholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Lambert, Richard, 2010. "Discussion of "Implications for GAAP from an analysis of positive research in accounting"," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2-3), pages 287-295, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jaecon:v:50:y:2010:i:2-3:p:287-295
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-4101(10)00038-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mary E. Barth, 2018. "The Future of Financial Reporting: Insights from Research," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 54(1), pages 66-78, March.
    2. Scott D. Dyreng & Rahul Vashishtha & Joseph Weber, 2017. "Direct Evidence on the Informational Properties of Earnings in Loan Contracts," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(2), pages 371-406, May.
    3. Richard Barker & Anne McGeachin, 2015. "An Analysis of Concepts and Evidence on the Question of Whether IFRS Should be Conservative," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 51(2), pages 169-207, June.
    4. Gordon, Elizabeth A. & Gotti, Giorgio & Ho, Joanna H. & Mora, Araceli & Morris, Richard D., 2019. "Commentary: Where is International Accounting Research Going? Issues Needing Further Investigation," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    5. Araceli Mora & Martin Walker, 2015. "The implications of research on accounting conservatism for accounting standard setting," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(5), pages 620-650, August.
    6. Mary E. Barth, 2015. "Financial Accounting Research, Practice, and Financial Accountability," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 51(4), pages 499-510, December.
    7. David B. Sutton & Carolyn J. Cordery & Tony Zijl, 2015. "The Purpose of Financial Reporting: The Case for Coherence in the Conceptual Framework and Standards," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 51(1), pages 116-141, March.
    8. Macve, R.H., 2015. "Fair value vs conservatism? Aspects of the history of accounting, auditing, business and finance from ancient Mesopotamia to modern China," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 124-141.
    9. Gao, Pingyang, 2013. "A measurement approach to conservatism and earnings management," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 251-268.
    10. Macve Richard, 2013. "“Trading Places”: A UK (and IFRS) Comment," Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 27-40, April.
    11. Dichev, Ilia D. & Graham, John R. & Harvey, Campbell R. & Rajgopal, Shiva, 2013. "Earnings quality: Evidence from the field," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 1-33.
    12. Kim, Jeong-Bon & Li, Yinghua & Zhang, Liandong, 2011. "CFOs versus CEOs: Equity incentives and crashes," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(3), pages 713-730, September.
    13. Anthony D. Miller & David Oldroyd, 2018. "An Economics Perspective on Financial Reporting Objectives," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 28(1), pages 104-108, March.
    14. Venky Nagar & Madhav V. Rajan & Korok Ray, 2018. "An information-based model for the differential treatment of gains and losses," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 622-653, June.
    15. Sherif Elhalaby & Adel Sarea & Awwad Alnesafi & Mujeeb Saif Mohsen Al-Absy, 2023. "The Adoption of AAOIFI Standards by Islamic Banks: Understanding the Microeconomic Consequences," Economies, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-22, January.
    16. John Richard Edwards & Trevor Boyns, 2022. "Published Accounts, Stewardship, and Decision Making: A Case Study 1863–1940," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 58(2), pages 300-333, June.
    17. Baylis, Richard M. & Burnap, Peter & Clatworthy, Mark A. & Gad, Mahmoud A. & Pong, Christopher K.M., 2017. "Private lenders’ demand for audit," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 78-97.
    18. 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.
    19. Donovan, John & Frankel, Richard & Lee, Joshua & Martin, Xiumin & Seo, Hojun, 2014. "Issues raised by studying DeFond and Zhang: What should audit researchers do?," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 327-338.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    GAAP Fair value FASB IASB;

    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:eee:jaecon:v:50:y:2010:i:2-3:p:287-295. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jae .

    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.