Accounting disclosures and stock price efficiency: Evidence from mandatory IFRS adoption
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate whether adopting a uniform set of accounting standards impacts stock price efficiency by introducing a novel empirical test imported from the finance literature. Using mandatory adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) as an exogenous shock to the accounting information disclosure environment and employing a difference-in-difference research design, we find that the extent to which stock prices deviate from their fundamental values decreases significantly following the adoption of IFRS. In cross-sectional tests, we further observe that the impact of IFRS adoption on stock price efficiency is more pronounced in countries with lower accounting quality prior to IFRS adoption and in those with substantial differences between their domestic Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and IFRS. Overall, our study contributes to the literature by empirically examining a fundamental aspect of the IFRS mission statement—whether IFRS adoption enhances financial market efficiency.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it