In this study we use the recently mandated risk factor disclosure to examine the spillover effect of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) review of qualitative corporate disclosure. We find that firms not receiving any comment letter (“No‐letter Firms”) modify their subsequent year's disclosures to a larger extent if the SEC has commented on the risk factor disclosure of (i) the industry leader, (ii) a close rival, or (iii) numerous industry peers. We refer to this effect as “spillover.” Further, we find that after SEC comments on the industry leader's disclosure, No‐letter Firms also provide more firm‐specific disclosures in the subsequent year. The increased disclosure specificity reduces these firms’ likelihood of receiving SEC risk disclosure comments on their new filings. Our evidence suggests an indirect effect of the SEC review of qualitative disclosure.

We propose financial statement similarity as a measure of financial reporting comparability. The firm‐pair version of our measure reflects the degree to which two firms report similar relations within their financial statement items; this version can help managers and market participants identify peer firms. The firm‐year version of our measure reflects the degree to which a firm reports financial statement relations that are similar to other members of its industry; this version can help market participants, regulators, and auditors screen firms for further attention. Our measure uses the presence and amounts of almost all financial items reported by a firm. We validate our measure in four sets of analyses to establish concurrent validity and in three sets of analyses to establish predictive validity. In all these tests, we contrast our measure with the comparability measure in De Franco et al. (2011) and a multivariate measure that considers the presence, but not amounts, of financial statement items. Our measure outperforms the alternatives and can be a useful tool for users.

Firms are required to provide financial information via the financial statements and the management discussion and analysis (MD&A), a narrative explanation of the financial statements. Our study examines how firms use the MD&A channel when their financial statement channel is inadequate. We focus on two textual attributes of the MD&A: non‐GAAP disclosure and forward‐looking statements. We find that firms with less adequate financial statements discuss non‐GAAP measures more and provide a larger number of forward‐looking statements. We then identify the topics, and therefore the context, in which non‐GAAP and forward‐looking disclosures are provided. Our study provides evidence on how managers use the MD&A, a relatively more flexible channel, to provide information when their financial statement channel is less adequate.

In recent years, quarterly earnings guidance has been harshly criticized for inducing “managerial short‐termism” and other ills. Managers are, therefore, urged by influential institutions to cease guidance. We examine empirically the causes of such guidance cessation and find that poor operating performance — decreased earnings, missing analyst forecasts, and lower anticipated profitability — is the major reason firms stop quarterly guidance. After guidance cessation, we do not find an appreciable increase in long‐term investment once managers free themselves from investors’ myopia. Contrary to the claim that firms would provide more alternative, forward‐looking disclosures in lieu of the guidance, we find that such disclosures are curtailed. We also find a deterioration in the information environment of guidance stoppers in the form of increased analyst forecast errors and forecast dispersion and a decrease in analyst coverage. Taken together, our evidence indicates that guidance stoppers are primarily troubled firms and stopping guidance does not benefit either the stoppers or their investors.

Depuis quelques années, les annonces de résultats trimestriels prévisionnels font l’objet de sévères critiques, leurs détracteurs affirmant qu’elles incitent à la gestion à courte vue et à d’autres péchés. C’est pourquoi les institutions influentes enjoignent aux dirigeants de cesser la publication de résultats trimestriels prévisionnels. Les auteurs examinent empiriquement les causes de cet abandon de la publication de résultats trimestriels prévisionnels et constatent que la piètre performance opérationnelle — bénéfices à la baisse, résultats inférieurs aux prévisions des analystes et rentabilité prévue plus faible — est le principal motif pour lequel les entreprises abandonnent les annonces de résultats trimestriels prévisionnels. Dans les entreprises qui ont abandonné ces annonces, les auteurs n’observent pas de croissance appréciable de l’investissement à long terme après que les dirigeants se soient libérés de la myopie des investisseurs. Contrairement à l’affirmation selon laquelle les entreprises publieraient davantage d’autres informations à caractère prévisionnel en remplacement des annonces de résultats trimestriels et prévisionnels, les auteurs constatent que les entreprises se dérobent. Ils observent également une détérioration de l’environnement informationnel des entreprises qui cessent la publication de résultats trimestriels prévisionnels, détérioration qui se manifeste par un plus grand nombre d’erreurs dans les prévisions des analystes et une plus grande dispersion des prévisions et par une diminution de l’intérêt des analystes. Ces constatations révèlent, dans leur ensemble, que les entreprises qui abandonnent les annonces de résultats trimestriels prévisionnels sont principalement des entreprises en difficulté, et que la décision d’abandon n’est avantageuse ni pour les entreprises qui la prennent ni pour leurs investisseurs.

In recent years, quarterly earnings guidance has been harshly criticized for inducing managerial short-termism and other ills. Managers are, therefore, urged by influential institutions to cease guidance. We examine empirically the causes of such guidance cessation and find that poor operating performance¿decreased earnings, missing analyst forecasts, and lower anticipated profitability¿is the major reason firms stop quarterly guidance. After guidance cessation, we do not find an appreciable increase in long-term investment once managers free themselves from investors' myopia. Contrary to the claim that firms would provide more alternative, forward-looking disclosures in lieu of the guidance, we find that such disclosures are curtailed. We also find a deterioration in the information environment of guidance stoppers in the form of increased analyst forecast errors and forecast dispersion and a decrease in analyst coverage. Taken together, our evidence indicates that guidance stoppers are primarily troubled firms and stopping guidance does not benefit either the stoppers or their investors.

Human capital is a major impetus for technological innovation. We examine the relation between the technological dimension of product market competition and the disclosure of skill requirements in job postings. On the one hand, technological competition may raise the urgency of recruiting tech talent and make firms provide more specific skill requirements. On the other hand, technological competition can increase the proprietary costs of skill requirement disclosure. Using technological peer pressure as a measure of technological competition, we find that firms facing intense technological competition provide more specific skill requirements for tech positions, suggesting that the disclosure benefits outweigh the proprietary costs when firms face pressure to innovate. The effect of technological peer pressure is more pronounced among firms that make only incremental innovations and less pronounced among firms that rely on trade secrets or have greater industry peer presence in close geographical proximity. Our study documents a distinct relationship between technological competition and voluntary disclosure targeted to labor market participants.

Natural language is a key form of business communication. Textual analysis is the application of natural language processing (NLP) to textual data for automated information extraction or measurement. We survey publications in top accounting journals and describe the trend and current state of textual analysis in accounting. We organize available NLP methods in a unified framework. Accounting researchers have often used textual analysis to measure disclosure sentiment, readability, and disclosure quantity; to compare disclosures to determine similarities or differences; to identify forward‐looking information; and to detect themes. For each of these tasks, we explain the conventional approach and newer approaches, which are based on machine learning, especially deep learning. We discuss how to establish the construct validity of text‐based measures and the typical decisions researchers face in implementing NLP models. Finally, we discuss opportunities for future research. We conclude that (i) textual analysis has grown as an important research method and (ii) accounting researchers should increase their knowledge and use of machine learning, especially deep learning, for textual analysis.