Market Efficiency, Bounded Rationality, and Supplemental Business Reporting Disclosures
The AICPA Special Committee on Financial Reporting has urged disclosure of relevant forward-looking information on risks and opportunities to supplement conventional financial statements. We conduct a laboratory market experiment to assess the effects of such disclosures on capital allocation decisi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of accounting research 2001-09, Vol.39 (2), p.243-268 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 268 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 243 |
container_title | Journal of accounting research |
container_volume | 39 |
creator | Dietrich, J. Richard Kachelmeier, Steven J. Kleinmuntz, Don N. Linsmeier, Thomas J. |
description | The AICPA Special Committee on Financial Reporting has urged disclosure of relevant forward-looking information on risks and opportunities to supplement conventional financial statements. We conduct a laboratory market experiment to assess the effects of such disclosures on capital allocation decisions. We develop two sets of competing hypotheses regarding how capital markets react to supplemental disclosures. One set is based on the assumption of semi-strong market efficiency, while the other posits that the bounded rationality of individual traders leads to inefficient market prices. We find that explicit disclosure of management's best estimate of an uncertain quantity improves market efficiency, even though this disclosure is redundant with information in financial statements. Second, we find disclosure of an upper bound of management's estimate has the potential to bias security prices upward, while informationally equivalent disclosure of both upper and lower bounds removes this bias. These results suggest that experimental market reactions to these supplemental disclosures are inconsistent with market efficiency. Supplemental analyses of individuals' price predictions and trading behavior support our conclusion that inefficiencies are at least partially attributable to individual information processing biases. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/1475-679X.00011 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_206726715</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>2672955</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>2672955</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4471-4a1741b6306ddf88f15fb225a26ab9546efa781729341ba3292989e6627dd36d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkcFPwyAYxYnRxDk9e_HQeLYb0ALtcZtzaqaLUzPjhbBCDbO2FWh0_73Uml3lQvJ9v_fy8j4AThEcIP-GKGYkpCx9GUAIEdoDvd1kH_QgxChMYkIPwZG1G4-kJEI9sLoT5l25YJrnOtOqzLYXwbhqSqlksBROV6UotPNDUcrgsanrQn2o0okiGDdWl8raYKnqyjhdvgWX2mZFZRuj7DE4yEVh1cnf3wfPV9OnyXU4X8xuJqN5mMUxQ2EsEIvRmkaQSpknSY5IvsaYCEzFOiUxVblgCWI4jTwmIpziNEkVpZhJGVEZ9cF551ub6rNR1vFN1Rgf2nIMKcOUIeKhYQdlprLWqJzXRn8Is-UI8rY83lbF26r4b3leEXeKL12o7X84v12Mlp3srJNtrKvMTuZT4JS0OcJura1T37u1v4A3i7zl6n7GGZ48UEZm_DX6AYQHiPI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>206726715</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Market Efficiency, Bounded Rationality, and Supplemental Business Reporting Disclosures</title><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><creator>Dietrich, J. Richard ; Kachelmeier, Steven J. ; Kleinmuntz, Don N. ; Linsmeier, Thomas J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Dietrich, J. Richard ; Kachelmeier, Steven J. ; Kleinmuntz, Don N. ; Linsmeier, Thomas J.</creatorcontrib><description>The AICPA Special Committee on Financial Reporting has urged disclosure of relevant forward-looking information on risks and opportunities to supplement conventional financial statements. We conduct a laboratory market experiment to assess the effects of such disclosures on capital allocation decisions. We develop two sets of competing hypotheses regarding how capital markets react to supplemental disclosures. One set is based on the assumption of semi-strong market efficiency, while the other posits that the bounded rationality of individual traders leads to inefficient market prices. We find that explicit disclosure of management's best estimate of an uncertain quantity improves market efficiency, even though this disclosure is redundant with information in financial statements. Second, we find disclosure of an upper bound of management's estimate has the potential to bias security prices upward, while informationally equivalent disclosure of both upper and lower bounds removes this bias. These results suggest that experimental market reactions to these supplemental disclosures are inconsistent with market efficiency. Supplemental analyses of individuals' price predictions and trading behavior support our conclusion that inefficiencies are at least partially attributable to individual information processing biases.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-8456</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1475-679X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/1475-679X.00011</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JACRBR</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Boston, USA and Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers Inc</publisher><subject>Asset allocation ; Average prices ; Balance sheets ; Bias ; Bounded rationality ; Capital markets ; Disclosure ; Effects ; Efficiency ; Efficient markets ; Energy economics ; Expected values ; Financial management ; Financial reporting ; Financial risk ; Financial statements ; Hypotheses ; Information processing ; Investors ; Laboratories ; Market prices ; Oil reserves ; Rationality ; Risk aversion ; Salvage value ; Studies</subject><ispartof>Journal of accounting research, 2001-09, Vol.39 (2), p.243-268</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2001 University of Chicago on behalf of the Institute of Professional Accounting</rights><rights>University of Chicago on behalf of the Institute of Professional Accounting, 2001</rights><rights>Copyright Institute of Professional Accounting Sept 2001</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4471-4a1741b6306ddf88f15fb225a26ab9546efa781729341ba3292989e6627dd36d3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2672955$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/2672955$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575,58017,58250</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dietrich, J. Richard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kachelmeier, Steven J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kleinmuntz, Don N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Linsmeier, Thomas J.</creatorcontrib><title>Market Efficiency, Bounded Rationality, and Supplemental Business Reporting Disclosures</title><title>Journal of accounting research</title><description>The AICPA Special Committee on Financial Reporting has urged disclosure of relevant forward-looking information on risks and opportunities to supplement conventional financial statements. We conduct a laboratory market experiment to assess the effects of such disclosures on capital allocation decisions. We develop two sets of competing hypotheses regarding how capital markets react to supplemental disclosures. One set is based on the assumption of semi-strong market efficiency, while the other posits that the bounded rationality of individual traders leads to inefficient market prices. We find that explicit disclosure of management's best estimate of an uncertain quantity improves market efficiency, even though this disclosure is redundant with information in financial statements. Second, we find disclosure of an upper bound of management's estimate has the potential to bias security prices upward, while informationally equivalent disclosure of both upper and lower bounds removes this bias. These results suggest that experimental market reactions to these supplemental disclosures are inconsistent with market efficiency. Supplemental analyses of individuals' price predictions and trading behavior support our conclusion that inefficiencies are at least partially attributable to individual information processing biases.</description><subject>Asset allocation</subject><subject>Average prices</subject><subject>Balance sheets</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Bounded rationality</subject><subject>Capital markets</subject><subject>Disclosure</subject><subject>Effects</subject><subject>Efficiency</subject><subject>Efficient markets</subject><subject>Energy economics</subject><subject>Expected values</subject><subject>Financial management</subject><subject>Financial reporting</subject><subject>Financial risk</subject><subject>Financial statements</subject><subject>Hypotheses</subject><subject>Information processing</subject><subject>Investors</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Market prices</subject><subject>Oil reserves</subject><subject>Rationality</subject><subject>Risk aversion</subject><subject>Salvage value</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>0021-8456</issn><issn>1475-679X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkcFPwyAYxYnRxDk9e_HQeLYb0ALtcZtzaqaLUzPjhbBCDbO2FWh0_73Uml3lQvJ9v_fy8j4AThEcIP-GKGYkpCx9GUAIEdoDvd1kH_QgxChMYkIPwZG1G4-kJEI9sLoT5l25YJrnOtOqzLYXwbhqSqlksBROV6UotPNDUcrgsanrQn2o0okiGDdWl8raYKnqyjhdvgWX2mZFZRuj7DE4yEVh1cnf3wfPV9OnyXU4X8xuJqN5mMUxQ2EsEIvRmkaQSpknSY5IvsaYCEzFOiUxVblgCWI4jTwmIpziNEkVpZhJGVEZ9cF551ub6rNR1vFN1Rgf2nIMKcOUIeKhYQdlprLWqJzXRn8Is-UI8rY83lbF26r4b3leEXeKL12o7X84v12Mlp3srJNtrKvMTuZT4JS0OcJura1T37u1v4A3i7zl6n7GGZ48UEZm_DX6AYQHiPI</recordid><startdate>200109</startdate><enddate>200109</enddate><creator>Dietrich, J. Richard</creator><creator>Kachelmeier, Steven J.</creator><creator>Kleinmuntz, Don N.</creator><creator>Linsmeier, Thomas J.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishers Inc</general><general>Blackwell Publishers</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200109</creationdate><title>Market Efficiency, Bounded Rationality, and Supplemental Business Reporting Disclosures</title><author>Dietrich, J. Richard ; Kachelmeier, Steven J. ; Kleinmuntz, Don N. ; Linsmeier, Thomas J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4471-4a1741b6306ddf88f15fb225a26ab9546efa781729341ba3292989e6627dd36d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Asset allocation</topic><topic>Average prices</topic><topic>Balance sheets</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Bounded rationality</topic><topic>Capital markets</topic><topic>Disclosure</topic><topic>Effects</topic><topic>Efficiency</topic><topic>Efficient markets</topic><topic>Energy economics</topic><topic>Expected values</topic><topic>Financial management</topic><topic>Financial reporting</topic><topic>Financial risk</topic><topic>Financial statements</topic><topic>Hypotheses</topic><topic>Information processing</topic><topic>Investors</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Market prices</topic><topic>Oil reserves</topic><topic>Rationality</topic><topic>Risk aversion</topic><topic>Salvage value</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dietrich, J. Richard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kachelmeier, Steven J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kleinmuntz, Don N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Linsmeier, Thomas J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Journal of accounting research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dietrich, J. Richard</au><au>Kachelmeier, Steven J.</au><au>Kleinmuntz, Don N.</au><au>Linsmeier, Thomas J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Market Efficiency, Bounded Rationality, and Supplemental Business Reporting Disclosures</atitle><jtitle>Journal of accounting research</jtitle><date>2001-09</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>39</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>243</spage><epage>268</epage><pages>243-268</pages><issn>0021-8456</issn><eissn>1475-679X</eissn><coden>JACRBR</coden><abstract>The AICPA Special Committee on Financial Reporting has urged disclosure of relevant forward-looking information on risks and opportunities to supplement conventional financial statements. We conduct a laboratory market experiment to assess the effects of such disclosures on capital allocation decisions. We develop two sets of competing hypotheses regarding how capital markets react to supplemental disclosures. One set is based on the assumption of semi-strong market efficiency, while the other posits that the bounded rationality of individual traders leads to inefficient market prices. We find that explicit disclosure of management's best estimate of an uncertain quantity improves market efficiency, even though this disclosure is redundant with information in financial statements. Second, we find disclosure of an upper bound of management's estimate has the potential to bias security prices upward, while informationally equivalent disclosure of both upper and lower bounds removes this bias. These results suggest that experimental market reactions to these supplemental disclosures are inconsistent with market efficiency. Supplemental analyses of individuals' price predictions and trading behavior support our conclusion that inefficiencies are at least partially attributable to individual information processing biases.</abstract><cop>Boston, USA and Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishers Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/1475-679X.00011</doi><tpages>26</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0021-8456 |
ispartof | Journal of accounting research, 2001-09, Vol.39 (2), p.243-268 |
issn | 0021-8456 1475-679X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_206726715 |
source | Access via Wiley Online Library; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing |
subjects | Asset allocation Average prices Balance sheets Bias Bounded rationality Capital markets Disclosure Effects Efficiency Efficient markets Energy economics Expected values Financial management Financial reporting Financial risk Financial statements Hypotheses Information processing Investors Laboratories Market prices Oil reserves Rationality Risk aversion Salvage value Studies |
title | Market Efficiency, Bounded Rationality, and Supplemental Business Reporting Disclosures |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T13%3A34%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Market%20Efficiency,%20Bounded%20Rationality,%20and%20Supplemental%20Business%20Reporting%20Disclosures&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20accounting%20research&rft.au=Dietrich,%20J.%20Richard&rft.date=2001-09&rft.volume=39&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=243&rft.epage=268&rft.pages=243-268&rft.issn=0021-8456&rft.eissn=1475-679X&rft.coden=JACRBR&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/1475-679X.00011&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E2672955%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=206726715&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=2672955&rfr_iscdi=true |