Examines the empirical association between trading volume and belief revisions that differ among individual analysts. Hypothesis based on relative positions of individual analysts' current and prior forecasts of earnings to measure differential belief revisions.

This study reports the results of an experiment showing that auditor assessments of litigation risk and planned audit investments are higher when potential errors overstate financial performance than when those errors understate performance. This result is much stronger in the presence of high levels of litigation risk in the client’s industry. These results suggest that in industries where litigation risk is high audited financial statements may contain more unintentional material understatement errors than overstatement errors. Thus, litigation risk—through its effect on auditors—may encourage financial statements that understate firm performance

This study provides evidence that differential interpretations are an important stimulus for speculative trading. We measure differential interpretations using data on analysts' revisions of forecasts of annual earnings after the announcement of quarterly earnings that are components of those annual earnings numbers. We find two conditions under which differential interpretations play a significant role in explaining trading. First, we present empirical evidence supporting Kandel and Pearson's (1995) argument that trading coincident with small price changes reflects investors' differential interpretations of information. This evidence is important because it is inconsistent with conventional models of trade that assume homogeneous interpretations. Second, we also find that differential interpre? tations explain a significant amount of the trading occurring in a sample where trading volume is higher than the (firm-specific) non-announcement period average. This result is consistent with informed traders acting on their differential interpretations when there is enough liquidity trading to help camouflage their own information-based trades. In sum, the study's results confirm Bachelier's (1900) intuition that differential interpretations are an important stimulus for trading.

This study examines the predictive value of Management Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) information. More specifically, this study tests the association between properties of analysts' earnings forecasts and MD&A quality, where MD&A quality is measured by the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). We find that high MD&A ratings are associated with less error and less dispersion in analysts' earnings forecasts after controlling for many other expected influences on analysts' forecasts. We also find that estimated regression coefficients are consistent with MD&A information having a substantial effect on earnings forecasts. Finally, we find our results are driven by forward‐looking disclosures about capital expenditures and operations, and also by historical disclosures about capital expenditures. These findings are consistent with the suggestion by many constituencies (including the SEC) that the type of information found in high quality MD&A is particularly relevant for predicting earnings.

This paper examines the ex ante effects of public information quality on market prices and how such effects vary with information asymmetry among traders in a two-period experimental market. We vary public information quality by changing its precision and information asymmetry among traders by varying the distribution of private signals. We find high-quality public disclosure leads to increased price efficiency and decreased cost of capital in the pre-announcement period when information asymmetry is high. The impending high-quality public information increases the competition among informed traders, which leads prices to impound more private information and alleviates the adverse selection problems facing uninformed traders. Our study suggests building a high-quality public information environment (e.g., by adopting high-quality accounting standards or committing to transparent disclosure policies) would likely provide ex ante benefits for firms with significant adverse selection among traders.

Most theoretical models of trade (Pfleiderer, 1984; Grundy and McNichols, 1989; Holthausen and Verrecchia, 1990; Kim and Verrecchia, 1991; Blume et al., 1994) imply that the trading volume prompted by a public announcement is positively related to the announcement's precision. Relying upon this notion, empirical researchers interpret high trading volume as an indication that an announcement is highly informative. We argue that such interpretations are not, in general, correct. In a world with transaction costs, the relation between information precision and trading volume is ambiguous and can be negative. This explains why, in empirical tests using data from actual markets, the relation between announcement precision and trading volume is not monotonically positive, even though in laboratory experiments it is. Our results imply that trading volume reactions to public announcements are most sensitive to announcement precision among low-transaction cost securities and in low-cost trading regimes.

In this study we examine changes in the precision and the commonality of information contained in individual analysts' earnings forecasts, focusing on changes around earnings announcements. Using the empirical proxies suggested by the Barron et al. (1998) model that are based on the across-analyst correlation in forecast errors, we conclude that the commonality of information among active analysts decreases around earnings announcements. We also conclude that the idiosyncratic information contained in these individual analysts' forecasts increases immediately after earnings announcements, and that this increase is more significant as more analysts revise their forecasts. These results are consistent with theories positing that an important role of accounting disclosures is to trigger the generation of idiosyncratic information by elite information processors such as financial analysts (Kim and Verrecchia 1994, 1997).

This study examines how financial disclosures with earnings announcements affect sell‐side analysts' information about future earnings, focusing on disclosures of financial statements and management earnings forecasts. We find that disclosures of balance sheets and segment data are associated with an increase in the degree to which analysts' forecasts of upcoming quarterly earnings are based on private information. Further analyses show that balance sheet disclosures are associated with an increase in the precision of both analysts' common and private information, segment disclosures are associated with an increase in analysts' private information, and management earnings forecast disclosures are associated with an increase in analysts' common information. These results are consistent with analysts processing balance sheet and segment disclosures into new private information regarding near‐term earnings. Additional analysis of conference calls shows that balance sheet, segment, and management earnings forecast disclosures are all associated with more discussion related to these items in the questions‐and‐answers section of conference calls, consistent with analysts playing an information interpretation role with respect to these disclosures.

The increase in investor diversity over the last 35–40 years prompted us to revisit trading volume reactions to earnings announcements and how these reactions vary with firm size. We argue that this increase in investor diversity would likely increase differences in the precision of pre‐announcement information around earnings announcements, particularly for large firms. This suggests that the role of earnings announcements in resolving investor disagreement, as reflected in trading volume reactions, has increased. Over the 35‐year period 1977–2011, we find a dramatic increase in the magnitude and frequency of volume reactions to earnings announcements, particularly for large firms. The increase in large firms’ trading volume reactions is so pronounced that the relation between volume reactions and firm size has turned positive in recent years, reversing Bamber's ( , ) previously documented negative relation. We provide intuition and empirical evidence that our results are attributable to the resolution of differential prior precision among increasingly diverse investors following large firms.

Large earnings surprises and negative earnings surprises represent more egregious errors in analysts' earnings forecasts. We find evidence consistent with our expectation that egregious forecast errors motivate analysts to work harder to develop or acquire relatively more private information in an effort to avoid future forecasting failures. Specifically, we find that after large or negative earnings surprises there is a greater reduction in the error in individual analysts' forecasts of future earnings, and these individual forecasts are based more heavily on individual analysts' private information. This increased reliance on private information reduces the error in the mean forecast of upcoming earnings (even after controlling for the effect of reduced error in individual forecasts). As reliance on private information increases, more of each individual forecast error is idiosyncratic, and thus averaged out in the computation of the mean forecast.