Improving consistency in interpreting SFAS 5 probability phrases

Ning Du, Kevin T. Stevens and John E. McEnroe

Research in Accounting Regulation, 2011, vol. 23, issue 1, 67-70

Abstract: Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies (SFAS No. 5), relies on verbal probability phrases to guide recognition or disclosure decisions for loss contingencies. One of the challenges facing accountants is that verbal probability terms are vague and may have multiple meanings; thus, different accountants may interpret the same probability phrase differently. Given this background, our study addresses the difficulty of interpreting verbal probability phrases and explores a simple way to improve judgment quality. Evidence from our experiment suggests that supplementing verbal probabilities with their corresponding numerical values reduces interpersonal variability in interpreting SFAS No. 5 terms.

Keywords: Judgment; Loss contingency; Numerical probability; Probability phrase; SFAS No. 5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2011
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S105204571100004X
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:reacre:v:23:y:2011:i:1:p:67-70

DOI: 10.1016/j.racreg.2011.03.003

Access Statistics for this article

Research in Accounting Regulation is currently edited by G. Previts

More articles in Research in Accounting Regulation from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().