Market Effects of Recognition and Disclosure

By Mary E. Barth, Greg Clinch, Toshi Shibano. 2003

185 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0a8e3fefa94fe1300a8f96d6af88f180f6f67da3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

Citations in the corpus

Required Disclosures in Financial Reports (2007, background): “25 In a laboratory market, Bloomfield and Libby (1996) document that information availability has capital market effects.”
What financial and non‐financial information on intangibles is value‐relevant? A review of the evidence (2008, unknown): “The evidence reviewed in this paper is consistent with the Barth et al. (2003) findings in the sense that the information on intangibles is value-relevant in spite of the obvious problems with reliable measurement.”
Comprehensive Income: Who's Afraid of Performance Reporting? (2010, background): “…from prior research on choices between recognition versus disclosure, which: (1) do affect the value of reported net income and other contractible accounting numbers, and (2) mostly focuses on consequences of this choice (e.g, Amir 1993; Aboody 1996; Barth et al. 2003; Ahmed et al. 2006).”
Fair-Value Pension Accounting (2007, background): “Aggregation is also relevant to prices if investors bear costs to interpret disclosures (Hirshliefer and Teoh, 2003; Barth et al., 2003; Dye and Sridhar, 2004).”
Evidence that Market Participants Assess Recognized and Disclosed Items Similarly when Reliability is Not an Issue (2013, background): “…Davis-Friday et al. 1999) have been attributed to some combination of (1) information effects, for example, differential processing costs (e.g., Barth et al. 2003) or differences in reliability (Choi et al. 1997; Davis-Friday et al. 2004; Choudhary 2011) or (2) systematic cognitive…”