2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2018.04.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Motivations behind users’ participation in the standard-setting process: Focus on financial analysts

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 63 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This research is very pertinent, as the regulators of the audit profession assess investors' perception towards the audit, request annotations from them, and take actions according to their desires to improve the value of the audit [24,48,75,81,[111][112][113]. However, this study has theoretical, practical, and also methodological contributions.…”
Section: Implications Of the Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This research is very pertinent, as the regulators of the audit profession assess investors' perception towards the audit, request annotations from them, and take actions according to their desires to improve the value of the audit [24,48,75,81,[111][112][113]. However, this study has theoretical, practical, and also methodological contributions.…”
Section: Implications Of the Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, an analysis for each constituent category is warranted. Recent studies have used the Durocher et al (2007) framework to analyze participation by financial analysts on IASB standard-setting (Allini et al 2018) and 16 participant types on GASB standard-setting (Kidwell and Lowensohn 2018). Our study examines the kind of response by the following seven types of respondents: (1) auditors, (2) college and university preparers, (3) healthcare organization preparers, (4) voluntary health and welfare organization preparers, (5) other NFP organization preparers, (6) individual and academic users, and (7) professional organizations.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Written submissions to the rule-makers are one way in which lobbying takes place. The analysis of comment letters to accounting standard-setting bodies is the most frequently used approach to examine attempts to influence the standard-setting process (e.g., Allini, Aria, Macchioni, and Zagaria 2018;Bline and Skekel 1991;Durocher and Fortin 2011;Durocher, Fortin, and Cote 2007;Georgiou 2002Georgiou , 2010Holder, Karim, Lin, and Woods 2013;Kidwell and Lowensohn 2018;Saemann 1999;Schalow 1995;Tandy and Wilburn 1996;Yen, Hirst, and Hopkins 2007). Sutton (1984) reasons that the cost/benefit calculation prompts the decision to lobby rule-makers.…”
Section: Theory and Research Questionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Financial analysts are sophisticated intermediaries between the firms and markets, who use all available information to form their earnings forecasts (Allini, Aria, Macchioni, & Zagaria, 2018;Barniv, Hope, Myring, & Thomas, 2009;Bratten, Gleason, Larocque, & Mills, 2017;Du & Budescu, 2018;Mauler, 2019;Zhou, 2016). Analysts' main objective is to release earnings forecasts that are input for stock recommendations (Friesen & Weller, 2006).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another issue that could affect analysts' earnings forecasts is analyst-specific characteristics. There is evidence that analysts' characteristics help explain why some analysts issue more accurate forecasts for some firms than others (Jeppson et al, 2018;Hong, Kubik, & Solomon, 2000;Hong & Kubik, 2003;Clement & Tse, 2005;Clarke & Subramanian, 2006;Allini et al, 2018;Zhou, 2016). Identifying those particular analysts' characteristics is a valuable exercise for all market participants that strive to increase the accuracy of forecasts.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%