IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/fubsbe/200413.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Experimental study of implications of SFAS 131: The effects of the new standard on the informativeness of segment reporting

Author

Listed:
  • Bar-Yosef, Sasson
  • Venezia, Itzhak

Abstract

This paper analyzes whether the new business segment reporting disclosure rules, SFAS 131, will actually provide capital market participants with more predictive ability than the previous rules. For this we conduct three experiments. Two experiments with advanced accounting students as subjects, where the experiments differ in the firm the subjects analyze, and the third with professional financial analysts. In each experiment we provide one group of subjects with accounting reports based on the new standard (New Rules Group, NRG), and another group with reports based on the old standard (Old Rules Group, ORG). We ask both groups to forecast several accounting and market values of a firm. We then compare the performance predictions and analyses of the two groups. Most of the forecasts of the NRG are neither significantly different from those of the ORG, nor significantly more accurate. Subjects also report the variables that they consider important in their analysis. 25% of the NRG students in Experiment I mention the segment data as being central in their decisions and 33% say they used segment or sector data. Among the analysts in Experiment II the corresponding percentages are 0% and 60%, respectively. Also in experiment III, where the subjects rank the top 4 variables they use in their predictions according to importance, segment repots receive a mediocre rank. It therefore appears that the reports according to the new rules, whereas noticeable by the subjects, do not have a major positive impact on their responses. The subjects also exhibit a considerable degree of overconfidence.

Suggested Citation

  • Bar-Yosef, Sasson & Venezia, Itzhak, 2004. "Experimental study of implications of SFAS 131: The effects of the new standard on the informativeness of segment reporting," Discussion Papers 2004/13, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:fubsbe:200413
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/49921/1/668829141.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philip G. Berger & Rebecca Hann, 2003. "The Impact of SFAS No. 131 on Information and Monitoring," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 163-223, May.
    2. Otley, Dt & Dias, Fjb, 1982. "Accounting Aggregation And Decision-Making Performance - An Experimental Investigation," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 171-188.
    3. Richard H. Thaler & Shlomo Benartzi, 2001. "Naive Diversification Strategies in Defined Contribution Saving Plans," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 79-98, March.
    4. Balakrishnan, R & Harris, Ts & Sen, Pk, 1990. "The Predictive Ability Of Geographic Segment Disclosures," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 305-325.
    5. Harris, MS, 1998. "The association between competition and managers' business segment reporting decisions," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 111-128.
    6. Maines, LA & McDaniel, LS & Harris, MS, 1997. "Implications of proposed segment reporting standards for financial analysts' investment judgments," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35, pages 1-24.
    7. Hopkins, PE, 1996. "The effect of financial statement classification of hybrid financial instruments on financial analysts' stock price judgments," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34, pages 33-50.
    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. Bitzer, Jurgen & Schrettl, Wolfram & Schroder, Philipp J.H., 2007. "Intrinsic motivation in open source software development," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 160-169, March.
    2. Boom, Anette, 2004. ""Download for Free": When do providers of digital goods offer free samples?," Discussion Papers 2004/28, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    3. Sasson Bar-Yosef & Itzhak Venezia, 2014. "An Experimental Study of Overconfidence in Accounting Numbers Predictions," International Journal of Economic Sciences, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2014(1), pages 78-89.
    4. Volckart, Oliver & Wolf, Nikolaus, 2004. "Estimating medieval market integration: Evidence from exchange rates," Discussion Papers 2004/21, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.

    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. Troberg, Pontus & Kinnunen, Juha & Seppänen, Harri J., 2010. "What drives cross-segment diversity in returns and risks? Evidence from Japanese and U.S. firms," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 44-76, March.
    2. André, Paul & Filip, Andrei & Moldovan, Rucsandra, 2016. "Segment Disclosure Quantity and Quality under IFRS 8: Determinants and the Effect on Financial Analysts' Earnings Forecast Errors," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 51(4), pages 443-461.
    3. Fields, Thomas D. & Lys, Thomas Z. & Vincent, Linda, 2001. "Empirical research on accounting choice," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1-3), pages 255-307, September.
    4. Ramnath, Sundaresh & Rock, Steve & Shane, Philip, 2008. "The financial analyst forecasting literature: A taxonomy with suggestions for further research," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 34-75.
    5. D. Eric Hirst & Lisa Koonce & Shankar Venkataraman, 2007. "How Disaggregation Enhances the Credibility of Management Earnings Forecasts," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(4), pages 811-837, September.
    6. Belen Blanco & Juan M. Garcia Lara & Josep A. Tribo, 2015. "Segment Disclosure and Cost of Capital," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(3-4), pages 367-411, April.
    7. Martin, Rachel, 2019. "Examination and implications of experimental research on investor perceptions," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 145-169.
    8. repec:ipg:wpaper:2014-076 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Ying Zhou, 2022. "Proprietary Costs and Corporate Lobbying Against Changes in Mandatory Disclosure," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(11), pages 8483-8505, November.
    10. Franzen, Nina & Weißenberger, Barbara E., 2018. "Capital market effects of mandatory IFRS 8 adoption: An empirical analysis of German firms," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 1-19.
    11. Ana Gisbert & Begoña Navallas & Domi Romero, 2014. "Proprietary costs, governance and the segment disclosure decision," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 18(3), pages 733-763, August.
    12. Edith Leung & Arnt Verriest, 2015. "The Impact of IFRS 8 on Geographical Segment Information," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(3-4), pages 273-309, April.
    13. Kou, Wenchao & Hussain, Simon, 2007. "Predictive gains to segmental disclosure matrices, geographic information and industry sector comparability," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 183-195.
    14. Badryah Alhusaini & Kimball L. Chapman & Hal D. White, 2023. "Private disclosure and myopia: evidence from the JOBS act," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 1570-1617, September.
    15. Hinson, Lisa & Tucker, Jennifer Wu & Weng, Diana, 2019. "The tradeoff between relevance and comparability in segment reporting," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 70-86.
    16. Lu, Jun & Shi, Zhen, 2018. "Does improved disclosure lead to higher executive compensation? Evidence from the conversion to IFRS and the dual-class share system in China," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 244-260.
    17. Dean Katselas & Jacqueline Birt & Xin Hao Kang, 2011. "International Firm Lobbying and ED 8 Operating Segments," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 21(2), pages 154-166, June.
    18. Dong, Xiaobo & Lin, K.C. & Kuang, Yingxu, 2014. "Are inter-segment revenues informative about future performance?," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 298-308.
    19. Ahmed Saleh & Ahmed Aboud & Yasser Eliwa, 2023. "IFRS 8 and the cost of capital in Europe," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(3), pages 3198-3231, July.
    20. Bradley Lail & Jason MacGregor & Martin Stuebs & Timothy Thomasson, 2015. "The Influence of Regulatory Approach on Tone at the Top," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 25-37, January.
    21. Art Durnev & Claudine Mangen, 2009. "Corporate Investments: Learning from Restatements," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(3), pages 679-720, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    segment reporting; FASB 131; experimental economics; overconfidence;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M40 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - General

    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:zbw:fubsbe:200413. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwfubde.html .

    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.