金融不端行为研究中的代理与数据库

Jonathan M. Karpoff, Allison Koester, D. S. Lee, Gerald S. Martin
{"title":"金融不端行为研究中的代理与数据库","authors":"Jonathan M. Karpoff, Allison Koester, D. S. Lee, Gerald S. Martin","doi":"10.2308/ACCR-51766","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT: An extensive literature examines the causes and effects of financial misconduct based on samples drawn from four popular databases that identify restatements, securities class action lawsuits, and Accounting and Auditing Enforcement Releases (AAERs). We show that the results from empirical tests can depend on which database is accessed. To examine the causes of such discrepancies, we compare the information in each database to a detailed sample of 1,243 case histories in which regulators brought enforcement actions for financial misrepresentation. These comparisons allow us to identify, measure, and estimate the economic importance of four features of each database that affect inferences from empirical tests. We show the extent to which each database is subject to these concerns and offer suggestions for researchers using these databases. JEL Classifications: G38; K22; K42; M41.","PeriodicalId":171263,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Governance: Arrangements & Laws eJournal","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"203","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Proxies and Databases in Financial Misconduct Research\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan M. Karpoff, Allison Koester, D. S. Lee, Gerald S. Martin\",\"doi\":\"10.2308/ACCR-51766\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT: An extensive literature examines the causes and effects of financial misconduct based on samples drawn from four popular databases that identify restatements, securities class action lawsuits, and Accounting and Auditing Enforcement Releases (AAERs). We show that the results from empirical tests can depend on which database is accessed. To examine the causes of such discrepancies, we compare the information in each database to a detailed sample of 1,243 case histories in which regulators brought enforcement actions for financial misrepresentation. These comparisons allow us to identify, measure, and estimate the economic importance of four features of each database that affect inferences from empirical tests. We show the extent to which each database is subject to these concerns and offer suggestions for researchers using these databases. JEL Classifications: G38; K22; K42; M41.\",\"PeriodicalId\":171263,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Corporate Governance: Arrangements & Laws eJournal\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-02-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"203\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Corporate Governance: Arrangements & Laws eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2308/ACCR-51766\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Governance: Arrangements & Laws eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2308/ACCR-51766","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 203

摘要

摘要:大量文献研究了金融不端行为的原因和影响,这些样本来自四个流行的数据库,包括重述、证券集体诉讼和会计和审计强制发布(AAERs)。我们表明,经验测试的结果可能取决于访问的是哪个数据库。为了检查这种差异的原因,我们将每个数据库中的信息与1,243个案例历史的详细样本进行了比较,在这些案例中,监管机构因财务虚假陈述而采取了执法行动。这些比较使我们能够识别、测量和估计每个数据库的四个特征的经济重要性,这些特征会影响经验检验的推论。我们展示了每个数据库受这些问题影响的程度,并为使用这些数据库的研究人员提供了建议。JEL分类:G38;K22;K42;M41。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Proxies and Databases in Financial Misconduct Research
ABSTRACT: An extensive literature examines the causes and effects of financial misconduct based on samples drawn from four popular databases that identify restatements, securities class action lawsuits, and Accounting and Auditing Enforcement Releases (AAERs). We show that the results from empirical tests can depend on which database is accessed. To examine the causes of such discrepancies, we compare the information in each database to a detailed sample of 1,243 case histories in which regulators brought enforcement actions for financial misrepresentation. These comparisons allow us to identify, measure, and estimate the economic importance of four features of each database that affect inferences from empirical tests. We show the extent to which each database is subject to these concerns and offer suggestions for researchers using these databases. JEL Classifications: G38; K22; K42; M41.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信