This paper tests the proposition that politicians and their affiliated firms (i.e., firms operating in their province) temporarily suppress negative information in response to political incentives. We examine the stock price behavior of Chinese listed firms around two visible political events—meetings of the National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party and promotions of high‐level provincial politicians—that are expected to asymmetrically increase the costs of releasing bad news. The costs create an incentive for local politicians and their affiliated firms to temporarily restrict the flow of negative information about the companies. The result will be fewer stock price crashes for the affiliated firms during these event windows, followed by an increase in crashes after the event. Consistent with these predictions, we find that the affiliated firms experience a reduction (an increase) in negative stock return skewness before (after) the event. These effects are strongest in the three‐month period directly preceding the event, among firms that are more politically connected, and when the province is dominated by faction politics and cronyism. Additional tests document a significant reduction in published newspaper articles about affected firms in advance of these political events, suggestive of a link between our observed stock price behavior and temporary shifts in the listed firms’ information environment.

We use experimental markets to examine how pushing investment information and the value relevance of that information interact to influence investors’ value estimate accuracy and market price efficiency. Developments in technology allow information to be pushed to investors anytime and anywhere. However, in addition to value‐relevant information, pushed information often includes information that is irrelevant for assessing firm value. Drawing on psychology theory, we find that pushing information has divergent effects depending on the value relevance of the information. Pushing only value‐relevant information increases investors’ processing of the information and leads to more accurate value estimates and market prices than when not pushed. In contrast, pushing a mix of value‐relevant and value‐irrelevant information reduces investors’ processing of value‐relevant information, leading to less accurate value estimates and market prices due to poorer acquisition and integration of information than when not pushed or when only value‐relevant information is pushed. Collectively, our results reveal a dark side to push technologies, particularly with the growing presence of value‐irrelevant information.

Recent regulatory amendments aimed at modernizing disclosures and enhancing their usefulness focus on repetition and interactivity within firms’ disclosure filings. We use two experiments to provide evidence on the effects of disclosure repetition (repeating of information in the filing) and disclosure interactivity (user involvement in directing the form or content of the information displayed) on investors’ information processing and investment judgments. Results show that repetition increases investors’ processing of repeated information, consistent with the informational role of repetition documented in prior research. In contrast, repetition reduces investors’ processing of other, nonrepeated information when the filing is less interactive. This evidence corroborates concerns that repetition can obscure value‐relevant information from investors. However, we find that more interactive disclosures mitigate this harmful effect of repetition on investors’ processing of nonrepeated information. Further, more interactive disclosures lead to deeper overall processing of both repeated and nonrepeated information, rather than more interactive disclosures redirecting investors’ attention and processing away from repeated information. Thus, our evidence suggests that disclosure interactivity is an important disclosure attribute that counteracts the potentially harmful effects of repetition on investors' processing of nonrepeated information, while preserving repetition's informational role.

The objective of this study is to investigate factors that influence investor information demand around earnings announcements and to provide insights into how variation in information demand impacts the capital market response to earnings. The Internet is one channel through which public information is disseminated to investors and we propose that one way that investors express their demand for public information is via Google searches. We find that abnormal Google search increases about two weeks prior to the earnings announcement, spikes markedly at the announcement, and continues at high levels for a period after the announcement. This finding suggests that information diffusion is not instantaneous with the release of the earnings information, but rather is spread over a period surrounding the announcement. We also find that information demand is positively associated with media attention and news, and is negatively associated with investor distraction. When investors search for more information in the days just prior to the announcement, preannouncement price and volume changes reflect more of the upcoming earnings news and there is less of a price and volume response when the news is announced. This result suggests that, when investors demand more information about a firm, the information content of the earnings announcement is partially preempted.

This paper examines the relation between accounting choice and U.S. institutional investor ownership in non‐U.S. firms. We predict that U.S. investors exhibit home bias in their preference for accounting methods conforming to U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) because such methods are more familiar, reduce information processing costs, and are perceived as higher quality. We find that firms exhibiting higher levels (changes) of U.S. GAAP conformity have greater levels (changes) of U.S. institutional ownership. Lead‐lag regressions suggest that increases in U.S. GAAP conformity precede increases in U.S. investment, but changes in U.S. institutional holdings do not precede changes in accounting methods. We also find that the positive relation between U.S. GAAP conformity and U.S. investment holds regardless of a firm's visibility to U.S. investors (e.g., American Depositary Receipt listing, stock index membership, analyst following, firm size). However, we find that U.S. GAAP conformity has a significantly greater impact among firms already visible to U.S. investors.

Existing research indicates that firms with high accruals are more likely to experience future earnings problems, but that investors' expectations, as reflected in stock prices, do not appear to anticipate these problems. In this paper, we directly examine the published opinions of two types of professional investor intermediaries to see if they provide investors with information concerning the future earnings problems experienced by firms with high accruals. First, we examine the earnings forecasts of sell‐side analysts. We show that analysts' earnings forecasts do not incorporate the predictable future earnings declines associated with high accruals. Second, we examine the behavior of independent auditors. We find no evidence that auditors signal the future earnings problems associated with high accruals through either their audit opinions or through auditor changes. Overall, our evidence indicates that analysts and auditors do not alert investors to the future earnings problems associated with high accruals, thus corroborating previous findings that investors do not appear to anticipate these problems.

Michael L. Ettredge, Daniel T. Simon, David B. Smith, Mary S. Stone, The Effect of the External Accountant's Review on the Timing of Adjustments to Quarterly Earnings, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 38, No. 1 (Spring, 2000), pp. 195-207

We study the use of generative AI for firm‐specific financial analysis on the Seeking Alpha platform. After the initial launch of ChatGPT in November 2022, the share of AI‐generated articles rose sharply to 13.5% of all articles, then declined in late 2023 after Seeking Alpha equated the use of AI to plagiarism and announced a prohibition on its use. We organize our study around two questions: (1) Does AI use increase author productivity? and (2) does AI use have capital market consequences and ultimately affect the informational landscape? We find that authors who adopt AI become more productive, publishing more articles and covering more new firms than non‐adopters. Findings on AI article informativeness are more nuanced. On average, AI articles are less informative than human‐written articles, eliciting smaller trading volume and abnormal return responses. However, AI use leads to increased firm coverage and in turn to improved liquidity and faster price discovery. Our findings suggest that, while AI‐generated articles are currently perceived as less informative than human‐written articles, their comparatively low cost enables increased firm coverage and thereby improves the overall informational landscape.

Using an international sample of 2,113 initial coin offerings (ICOs), we explore the role of disclosure and information intermediaries in the unregulated crypto‐tokens market. First, we document substantial cross‐sectional variation in the voluntary disclosure practices of ventures seeking to raise capital through ICOs, such as the extent of information released in a prospectus‐type document called a white paper; releasing the technical source code; and communicating through social media platforms. Second, we find that, even with limited disclosure verifiability, ventures with higher levels of disclosure have a greater ability to raise capital. Finally, we find that this association is stronger in the presence of mechanisms that lend credibility to ventures’ voluntary disclosures, such as internal governance practices or external scrutiny from information intermediaries. Overall, our results suggest that voluntary disclosure and information intermediaries facilitate the functioning of ICOs as an alternative capital market.

We examine whether a shock to the enforceability of Regulation Fair Disclosure (Reg FD) limited its ability to restrict the flow of private information between managers and investors. Although prior work provides evidence that Reg FD reduced managers’ selective disclosure of material information immediately following its promulgation, we posit that private information flows returned as a result of the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC's) public enforcement failure in SEC v. Siebel Systems, Inc . Using multiple settings, we find consistent evidence suggesting that Siebel changed the cost–benefit tradeoff for Reg FD compliance and effectively reversed the initial effects of the regulation. We also find that Siebel disrupted the equilibrium of selective disclosure activity, resulting in an unleveling effect among investors with respect to private information advantages. Finally, we find that Siebel also had real effects by altering managers’ capital structure decisions. Our findings run counter to the prevailing “mosaic theory” and gradual learning explanations for private information advantages in the extended post–Reg FD period and highlight the importance of enforcement in achieving intended regulatory outcomes.