MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1537405701

Accounting Diversity and the Value Relevance of Accounting Earnings and Book Value in Four Countries-The United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and Japan

2002· article· en· W1537405701 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kathy H. Y. Hsu, Harlan L. Etheridge

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Accounting and Financial Studies journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccountingEarningsValuation (finance)Earnings response coefficientBook valueEconomicsPositive accountingAccounting information systemMarket valueValue (mathematics)Capital marketFair valueFinancial accountingFinanceStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Diversities in accounting standards across different countries are of serious concern to the international investment community. Analysts, investors and security regulators have indicated that accounting differences can affect the usefulness of accounting numbers in assessing firm values (Choi andMueller 1992). This paper investigates the impact of accounting diversity on the relative value relevance of accounting summary numbers in four countries: the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and Japan. Accounting systems of these four countries are of interest because of the varying degree of perceived conservatism in accounting measurement practices across these four accounting systems and the size of the capital markets in these four countries. To assess the differences in value relevance of two accounting summary numbers, earnings and book value, across different countries, we use empirical models and measurements that allow direct comparisons of the weights assigned to accounting earnings and book value by market participants of these four countries. To compare the relative value relevance of accounting earnings with that of accounting book value within each country, we use a standardized procedure to control the scale differences in earnings and book value so that the earnings valuation coefficient and the book value valuation coefficient can be compared. A ratio measure, which scales the valuation coefficients by the overall informativeness of earnings and book value of each country, is used to allow additional cross-country comparisons. The results show that systematic differences in the importance of earnings and book value do exist across national boundaries. On average, earnings are more important than book value in explaining firm values in the U.S. and the U.K., while book value is more important than earnings in Canada and Japan. In a model incorporating both earnings and book value to explain market values, accounting earnings and book value both have incremental value relevance over each other for the U.S. and Canadian samples. However, U.K. accounting book value and Japanese earnings do not consistently have incremental value relevance. Our results also indicate trends of change in the overall, as well as the relative, importance of earnings and book value over the sample period. In particular, the overall value relevance of accounting earnings and book value increases over time for all four countries, and the value relevance of accounting book value relative to accounting earnings increases in both Canada and the U.K. over the sample period. Neither the U.S. or Japan show significant changes in the relative value relevance of the accounting numbers over the sample period. INTRODUCTION Diversities in accounting standards in different countries pose significant challenges to the international investment community. While current efforts to harmonize international accounting standards by the International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) are laudable, differences in accounting standards across national boundaries largely remain a fact of life. Although participants in the international investment community recognize that differences in accounting measurement and disclosure rules across countries can affect the usefulness of accounting numbers in accessing firm values and affect the flow of international capital, empirical evidence on the comparative impact of accounting diversity on firm valuation across various accounting regions is still limited. This paper investigates the impact of accounting diversity on the relative value relevance of accounting summary numbers in four countries: the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and Japan. These four countries are highly developed nations with historically different accounting concepts and accounting practices. Each of these four countries also has very active capital markets 1 and high levels of foreign direct investment flows. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.313
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Accounting and Financial Studies journalSame topicAuditing, Earnings Management, GovernanceFrench-language works237,207