This research investigates how financial statement users' judgments and decisions are affected by the extent to which a firm's actual accounting choices match users' expectations. Based on prior communications research, I predict and find that users' credibility judgments are more extreme when a firm's actual accounting choices do not match expectations. Experiment 1 supports this prediction in a stock-based compensation context, and Experiment 2 supports it in an accounting estimate context. Further, evidence from Experiment 1 supports the prediction that credibility judgments mediate the effect of a mismatch on investment decisions. Finally, evidence from Experiment 2 partially supports the prediction that users who encounter a mismatch between actual and expected accounting choices are more likely to search for additional information than are users who encounter a match. The results have implications for accounting researchers, regulators, and managers interested in understanding how firms' accounting choices affect users' decisions.

Current financial reporting guidance allows managers flexibility as to whether to disaggregate income statement items. Such flexibility is problematic if managers prefer to aggregate in some situations and disaggregate in others because we conjecture that investors' evaluations of firms will predictably differ depending on whether performance information is shown in an aggregated or disaggregated fashion. We conduct a series of related experiments within the context of compound financial instruments to investigate whether managers' preferences follow the predictions of mental accounting theory; specifically, that presentation preferences vary as a function of the sign and relative magnitude of the income statement items. Results reveal that managers' disaggregation preferences reflect mental accounting. Further, the effects of mental accounting are moderated only when managers feel high pressure to report transparently. Finally, and most importantly, the preferred presentations of managers result in the highest firm valuations from investors, indicating that investors also rely on mental accounting. Our study has implications for standard setters, regulators, and researchers.

We examine how information dissemination via mobile device applications (apps) affects nonprofessional investors' judgments. In response to the prevalence of mobile device use, the media ungroups content into smaller pieces to accommodate users, and apps use push notifications to highlight this content. These changes increase users' ability to access investment information in real time, leaving some investors feeling as if they are missing out if they are not continuously connected. We validate a scale to capture investors' fear of missing out on investment information (I-FoMO) and document that I-FoMO is distinct from traditional FoMO that occurs in social settings. Then, using an experiment, we find that receiving ungrouped content via a mobile device has a greater effect on investment allocations in the presence, rather than absence, of push notifications. Further, we find that these results hold for higher, but not for lower, I-FoMO investors. JEL Classifications: G23; M41; M48; M49. Data Availability: Contact the authors.