1985
DOI: 10.1016/0278-4254(85)90009-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparability: An analytic examination

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

1986
1986
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Revsine (1983, in an interesting analytical framework, examines the relative comparability of "historical cost" versus "current cost" balance sheet numbers. Revsine (1985) notes that timing differences of asset purchases across firms are a major source for the noncomparability of HCA data, and suggests the following three reasons for the noncomparability: (1) general change in purchasing power, (2) exogenous demand shifts (i.e., change in the price structure), and (3) depreciation methods (p. 7).…”
Section: Expected and Achievable Comparabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Revsine (1983, in an interesting analytical framework, examines the relative comparability of "historical cost" versus "current cost" balance sheet numbers. Revsine (1985) notes that timing differences of asset purchases across firms are a major source for the noncomparability of HCA data, and suggests the following three reasons for the noncomparability: (1) general change in purchasing power, (2) exogenous demand shifts (i.e., change in the price structure), and (3) depreciation methods (p. 7).…”
Section: Expected and Achievable Comparabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Barlev and Haddad (2007) in 2007 have promoted this one. Revsine (1985) in 1985 have claimed that "the resource allocation depends on the comparison of the investment alternatives", while Radebaugh, Gray, and Sidney (1997) in 1997 and have considered the efficiency level of national resources utilization and international wealth allocation.…”
Section: Literature Review Data Assumptions and Research Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%