正式与非正式制度与公允价值意见购买:制度失范理论视角

IF 1.1 Q3 BUSINESS, FINANCE
June Cao
{"title":"正式与非正式制度与公允价值意见购买:制度失范理论视角","authors":"June Cao","doi":"10.1108/jal-10-2022-0103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe objective of this study is to examine how formal and informal institutional environment influences managers’ fair value opinion shopping behaviour in the largest International Financial Reporting Standards adopter, China.Design/methodology/approachTo test the hypotheses, I conduct a 2 × 2 between-subject randomised experiment since the inferences about cause and effect are important in this study. The between-subject experimental situations are manipulated on the basis of the financial condition of companies and boards’ oversight.FindingsI find that managers are likely to seek favourable fair value opinions from external valuation professionals when they are under the weak boards’ oversight and high stress to meet the regulation target of the China Securities Regulatory Commission. These results are more pronounced for managers with higher both rent-seeking and favour-seeking guanxi orientations are more likely to engage in fair value opinion shopping.Originality/valueConsistent with theoretical analysis of Balfoort et al. (2017), this study provides empirical evidence that guanxi influences the neutrality and faithful representation in fair value measurement in China. In addition, the findings extend Salzsieder’s study (2015) and reflect the context-embeddedness nature of accounting.","PeriodicalId":45666,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Accounting Literature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Formal and informal institutions and fair value opinion shopping: an institutional anomie theory perspective\",\"authors\":\"June Cao\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jal-10-2022-0103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeThe objective of this study is to examine how formal and informal institutional environment influences managers’ fair value opinion shopping behaviour in the largest International Financial Reporting Standards adopter, China.Design/methodology/approachTo test the hypotheses, I conduct a 2 × 2 between-subject randomised experiment since the inferences about cause and effect are important in this study. The between-subject experimental situations are manipulated on the basis of the financial condition of companies and boards’ oversight.FindingsI find that managers are likely to seek favourable fair value opinions from external valuation professionals when they are under the weak boards’ oversight and high stress to meet the regulation target of the China Securities Regulatory Commission. These results are more pronounced for managers with higher both rent-seeking and favour-seeking guanxi orientations are more likely to engage in fair value opinion shopping.Originality/valueConsistent with theoretical analysis of Balfoort et al. (2017), this study provides empirical evidence that guanxi influences the neutrality and faithful representation in fair value measurement in China. In addition, the findings extend Salzsieder’s study (2015) and reflect the context-embeddedness nature of accounting.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45666,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Accounting Literature\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Accounting Literature\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jal-10-2022-0103\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Accounting Literature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jal-10-2022-0103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是考察正式和非正式的制度环境如何影响最大的国际财务报告准则采纳国中国管理者的公允价值意见购买行为。设计/方法/方法为了检验假设,我进行了一个2 × 2的受试者之间的随机实验,因为关于因果关系的推论在本研究中很重要。主体间实验情境是根据公司的财务状况和董事会的监督来操纵的。研究发现,当管理者处于弱势董事会的监督之下,且面对证监会监管目标的压力较大时,他们更倾向于向外部估值专业人士寻求有利的公允价值意见。这些结果在具有较高的寻租和寻求关系倾向的管理者中更为明显,他们更有可能参与公允价值意见购物。原创性/价值与Balfoort et al.(2017)的理论分析一致,本研究提供了经验证据,证明关系影响中国公允价值计量中的中立性和忠实代表性。此外,研究结果扩展了salzsiider(2015)的研究,并反映了会计的情境嵌入性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Formal and informal institutions and fair value opinion shopping: an institutional anomie theory perspective
PurposeThe objective of this study is to examine how formal and informal institutional environment influences managers’ fair value opinion shopping behaviour in the largest International Financial Reporting Standards adopter, China.Design/methodology/approachTo test the hypotheses, I conduct a 2 × 2 between-subject randomised experiment since the inferences about cause and effect are important in this study. The between-subject experimental situations are manipulated on the basis of the financial condition of companies and boards’ oversight.FindingsI find that managers are likely to seek favourable fair value opinions from external valuation professionals when they are under the weak boards’ oversight and high stress to meet the regulation target of the China Securities Regulatory Commission. These results are more pronounced for managers with higher both rent-seeking and favour-seeking guanxi orientations are more likely to engage in fair value opinion shopping.Originality/valueConsistent with theoretical analysis of Balfoort et al. (2017), this study provides empirical evidence that guanxi influences the neutrality and faithful representation in fair value measurement in China. In addition, the findings extend Salzsieder’s study (2015) and reflect the context-embeddedness nature of accounting.
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
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
期刊介绍: The objective of the Journal is to publish papers that make a fundamental and substantial contribution to the understanding of accounting phenomena. To this end, the Journal intends to publish papers that (1) synthesize an area of research in a concise and rigorous manner to assist academics and others to gain knowledge and appreciation of diverse research areas or (2) present high quality, multi-method, original research on a broad range of topics relevant to accounting, auditing and taxation. Topical coverage is broad and inclusive covering virtually all aspects of accounting. Consistent with the historical mission of the Journal, it is expected that the lead article of each issue will be a synthesis article on an important research topic. Other manuscripts to be included in a given issue will be a mix of synthesis and original research papers. In addition to traditional research topics and methods, we actively solicit manuscripts of the including, but not limited to, the following: • meta-analyses • field studies • critiques of papers published in other journals • emerging developments in accounting theory • commentaries on current issues • innovative experimental research with strong grounding in cognitive, social or anthropological sciences • creative archival analyses using non-standard methodologies or data sources with strong grounding in various social sciences • book reviews • "idea" papers that don''t fit into other established categories.
×
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