A Comparative Analysis of Auditor, Manager and Financial Analyst Interpretations of SFAS 5 Disclosure Guidelines

Joseph Aharony and Amihud Dotan

Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 2004, vol. 31, issue 3‐4, 475-504

Abstract: This study examines empirically whether financial analysts (users), as well as managers (preparers) and external auditors ascribe different interpretations to the SFAS 5 disclosure criteria. We find: (1) financial analysts are, on average, more conservative than managers and auditors in their numerical interpretations of both the ‘remote’ and ‘probable’ verbal phrases; (2) managers and auditors share very similar numerical interpretations of these verbal phrases; (3) audit partners’ numerical interpretations of the ‘remote’ region are between those of managers and users, whereas audit managers align their numerical interpretations with those of managers. One danger is that preparers of financial statements may omit loss contingency information that users consider valuable.

Date: 2004
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0306-686X.2004.00547.x

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:bla:jbfnac:v:31:y:2004:i:3-4:p:475-504

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0306-686X

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Business Finance & Accounting is currently edited by P. F. Pope, A. W. Stark and M. Walker

More articles in Journal of Business Finance & Accounting from Wiley Blackwell
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().