IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v8y2020i9p1552-d411461.html

The Theory of Cognitive-Conditional Conservatism in Accounting

Author

Listed:
  • Rodrigo de Oliveira Leite

    (COPPEAD Graduate School of Business, The Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rua Pascoal Lemme 355 Office 423, Rio de Janeiro 21941-902, Brazil)

  • Ricardo Lopes Cardoso

    (Brazilian School of Public and Business Administration, Getulio Vargas Foundation, Rua Jornalista Orlando Dantas, 30, sala 206, Rio de Janeiro 22231-010, Brazil)

Abstract

Literature from multiple fields in psychology and economics have identified that impulsive individuals are more prone to riskier behavior and are less conservative. Accounting literature has studied conservatism for many years, and demonstrated that there are two roots of conservatism, one unconditional and another conditional to news available at decision-making. However, there is no bridge linking both. Using an analytical model, we show that the conservatism level of an accountant is lower for impulsive individuals because of their reduced focus on future consequences of their decisions, which is coupled with an increased focus on present consequences. Hence, we put forward a theory of “cognitive-conditional conservatism”, that is, a third root of conservatism. Additionally, we also prove the asymmetry property of this behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Rodrigo de Oliveira Leite & Ricardo Lopes Cardoso, 2020. "The Theory of Cognitive-Conditional Conservatism in Accounting," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-7, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:8:y:2020:i:9:p:1552-:d:411461
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/8/9/1552/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/8/9/1552/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    2. Doupnik, Timothy S. & Riccio, Edson Luiz, 2006. "The influence of conservatism and secrecy on the interpretation of verbal probability expressions in the Anglo and Latin cultural areas," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 237-261.
    3. Leite, Rodrigo de Oliveira & Cardoso, Ricardo Lopes & Jelihovschi, Ana Paula Gomes & Civitarese, Jamil, 2020. "Job market compensation for cognitive reflection ability," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 87-93.
    4. Cronqvist, Henrik & Yu, Frank, 2017. "Shaped by their daughters: Executives, female socialization, and corporate social responsibility," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(3), pages 543-562.
    5. Keela S. Thomson & Daniel M. Oppenheimer, 2016. "Investigating an alternate form of the cognitive reflection test," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(1), pages 99-113, January.
    6. 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.
    7. Liersch, Michael J. & McKenzie, Craig R.M., 2009. "Duration neglect by numbers--And its elimination by graphs," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 303-314, March.
    8. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
    9. Hoppe, Eva I. & Kusterer, David J., 2011. "Behavioral biases and cognitive reflection," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 110(2), pages 97-100, February.
    10. Doupnik, Timothy S. & Richter, Martin, 2003. "Interpretation of uncertainty expressions: a cross-national study," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 15-35, January.
    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. Ricardo Lopes Cardoso & Rodrigo de Oliveira Leite & André Carlos Busanelli de Aquino, 2023. "Probable at First Glance, but Unlikely After Closer Look: The Role of Cognitive Reflection Ability on the Assessment of Probabilistic Expressions," The International Journal of Accounting (TIJA), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 58(02), pages 1-31, June.

    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. Leonardo P. Barcellos & Ricardo L. Cardoso & Rodrigo de O. Leite, 2025. "The effects of cognitive reflection and work experience on financial statement comparability under principles-based accounting standards," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(2), pages 449-471, March.
    2. Ricardo Lopes Cardoso & Rodrigo de Oliveira Leite & André Carlos Busanelli de Aquino, 2023. "Probable at First Glance, but Unlikely After Closer Look: The Role of Cognitive Reflection Ability on the Assessment of Probabilistic Expressions," The International Journal of Accounting (TIJA), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 58(02), pages 1-31, June.
    3. Ludwig, Jonas & Achtziger, Anja, 2021. "Cognitive misers on the web: An online-experiment of incentives, cheating, and cognitive reflection," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    4. Gerardo Sabater-Grande & Nikolaos Georgantzís & Noemí Herranz-Zarzoso, 2023. "Goals and guesses as reference points: a field experiment on student performance," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 94(2), pages 249-274, February.
    5. Brañas-Garza, Pablo & Kujal, Praveen & Lenkei, Balint, 2019. "Cognitive reflection test: Whom, how, when," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    6. Ruffle, Bradley J. & Wilson, Anne E., 2019. "Tat will tell: Tattoos and time preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 566-585.
    7. Antonio M. Espin & Valerio Capraro & Brice Corgnet & Simon Gachter & Roberto Hernan-Gonzalez & Praveen Kujal & Stephen Rassenti, 2021. "Differences in Cognitive Reflection Mediate Gender Differences in Social Preferences," Working Papers 21-22, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    8. Mihael A. Jeklic, 2023. "Can you trust your lawyer's call? Legal advisers exhibit myside bias resistant to debiasing interventions," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(2), pages 409-433, June.
    9. Fabian Herweg & Svenja Hippel & Daniel Müller & Fabio Römeis, 2024. "Axiom Preferences and Choice Mistakes under Risk," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 326, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    10. Alós-Ferrer, Carlos & Hügelschäfer, Sabine, 2016. "Faith in intuition and cognitive reflection," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 61-70.
    11. Corgnet, Brice & DeSantis, Mark & Porter, David, 2020. "The distribution of information and the price efficiency of markets," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    12. Jinrui Pan & Jason Shachat & Sijia Wei, 2020. "Cognitive reflection and economic order quantity inventory management: An experimental investigation," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(6), pages 998-1009, September.
    13. Jonathan Chapman & Erik Snowberg & Stephanie Wang & Colin Camerer, 2018. "Loss Attitudes in the U.S. Population: Evidence from Dynamically Optimized Sequential Experimentation (DOSE)," NBER Working Papers 25072, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Holden, Stein T. & Tilahun, Mesfin, 2019. "How related are risk preferences and time preferences?," CLTS Working Papers 4/19, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies, revised 16 Oct 2019.
    15. Ray Saadaoui Mallek & Mohamed Albaity, 2019. "Individual differences and cognitive reflection across gender and nationality the case of the United Arab Emirates," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 1567965-156, January.
    16. Kai Duttle & Keigo Inukai, 2015. "Complexity Aversion: Influences of Cognitive Abilities, Culture and System of Thought," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 35(2), pages 846-855.
    17. Mohammad Noori, 2016. "Cognitive reflection as a predictor of susceptibility to behavioral anomalies," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(1), pages 114-120, January.
    18. Corgnet, Brice & DeSantis, Mark & Porter, David, 2021. "Information aggregation and the cognitive make-up of market participants," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    19. Antonio Mastrogiorgio & Enrico Petracca, 2014. "Numerals as triggers of System 1 and System 2 in the ‘bat and ball’ problem," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 13(1), pages 135-148, June.
    20. Benjamin Enke & Uri Gneezy & Brian Hall & David Martin & Vadim Nelidov & Theo Offerman & Jeroen van de Ven, 2020. "Cognitive Biases: Mistakes or Missing Stakes?," CESifo Working Paper Series 8168, CESifo.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jmathe:v:8:y:2020:i:9:p:1552-:d:411461. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.