In this paper we critically evaluate the standard-setting inferences that can be drawn from value relevance research studies that are motivated by standard setting. Our evaluation concentrates on the theories of accounting, standard setting and valuation that underlie those inferences. Unless those underlying theories are descriptive of accounting, standard setting and valuation, the value-relevance literature's reported associations between accounting numbers and common equity valuations have limited implications or inferences for standard setting; they are mere associations. We argue that the underlying theories are not descriptive and hence drawing standard-setting inferences is difficult.

This paper reports the results of an experimental economics study designed to examine reputation building by information verifiers (auditors). The results identify boundary conditions to reputation formation and supply insight into auditors’ incentives to form reputations. Reputations form in all sessions of treatments that supply nearly immediate rewards to participants who adopt reputation equilibrium strategies. In contrast, reputations form in less than half of the sessions of a treatment where participants have to maintain reputation equilibrium strategies for number of periods before the market rewards their effort. The results suggest the immediacy of rewards for adopting reputation strategies is a critical determinant of reputation formation.

This study examines abnormal stock price changes prior to executive stock option grants. Executives have the incentive and opportunity to manage the timing of their communications of inside information to the market during the period just prior to the date of their stock-option grant so as to reduce the exercise price of their options. Executives benefit from temporary stock price decreases before the grant date and by stock price increases after the grant date. Executive stock option grants create a unique opportunity for insiders to profit by manipulating the timing of information flowing to the market without engaging in insider trading. Using data on 783 stock-option grants to chief executive officers, we find a statistically significant abnormal decrease in stock prices during the 10-day period immediately preceding the grant date.

This paper examines the role buyout specialists play in structuring the debt used to finance the LBO and in monitoring management in the post-LBO firm. We find that when buyout specialists control the majority of the post-LBO equity, the LBO transaction is likely to be financed with less short-term and/or senior debt and less likely to experience financial distress. We also find that buyout specialists have greater board representation on smaller boards, suggesting that they actively monitor managers, and that for these transactions, using debt with tighter terms does not significantly increase the firm's performance. In contrast, in all other transactions using such debt does significantly increase the firm's performance. These findings suggest that active monitoring by a buyout specialist substitutes for tighter debt terms in monitoring and motivating managers of LBOs.

This paper considers testing problems where several of the standard regularity conditions fail to hold. We consider the case where (i) parameter vectors in the null hypothesis may lie on the boundary of the maintained hypothesis and (ii) there may be a nuisance parameter that appears under the alternative hypothesis, but not under the null. The paper establishes the asymptotic null and local alternative distributions of quasi-likelihood ratio, rescaled quasi-likelihood ratio, Wald, and score tests in this case. The results apply to tests based on a wide variety of extremum estimators and apply to a wide variety of models. Examples treated in the paper are: (i) tests of the null hypothesis of no conditional heteroskedasticity in a GARCH(1, 1) regression model and (ii) tests of the null hypothesis that some random coefficients have variances equal to zero in a random coefficients regression model with (possibly) correlated random coefficients.

In this paper we seek to document errors that could affect studies of earnings management. The book income adjustment (BIA) of the alternative minimum tax (AMT) created apparently strong incentives to manage book income downward in 1987. Five earlier papers using different methodologies and samples all conclude that earnings were reduced in response to the BIA. This consensus of findings offers an opportunity to investigate our speculation that methodological biases are more likely when there appear to be clear incentives for earnings management. A reexamination of these studies uncovers potential biases related to a variety of factors, including choices of scaling variables, selection of affected and control samples, and measurement error in estimated discretionary accruals. A reexamination of the argument underlying these studies also suggests that the incentives to manage earnings are less powerful than initially predicted, and are partially mitigated by tax and non-tax factors. As a result, we believe that the extent of earnings management that occurred in 1987 in response to the BIA remains an unresolved issue.

This paper examines the optimal structure of hierarchies when workers differ in the range of tasks they can perform. A hierarchical system may reduce costs by allowing most tasks to be handled by unskilled workers. This may however increase delay for those tasks which must pass through several layers before reaching the appropriate level. The paper characterises an optimal hierarchy when such a trade-off exists.

To what extent must nations cede control over their economic and social policies if global efficiency is to be achieved in an interdependent world? This question is at the center of the debate over the future role of the WTO (formerly GATT) in the realm of labor and environmental standards. In this paper we establish that the market access focus of current WTO rules is well equipped to handle the problems associated with choices over labor and environmental standards. In principle, with relatively modest changes that grant governments more sovereignty, not less, these rules can deliver globally efficient outcomes.

This paper reports the results of an experiment that investigates how external audit planning is affected when internal auditors have incentives and the opportunity to bias their evaluations. Specifically, we draw on attribution theory to examine how internal auditor eligibility for incentive compensation and participation in consulting (i.e., two factors that provide incentives to bias audit evaluations) affect external audit planning. In addition, we examine the effects of incentive compensation and a consulting role across two routine internal audit tasks — an objective tests of controls task and a subjective inventory valuation task — to evaluate whether their effects are contingent upon task subjectivity (i.e., opportunity to bias audit evaluations). Seventy‐six external auditors from four Big 5 public accounting firms participated in an experiment that manipulated internal auditor compensation (fixed salary versus incentive compensation), the type of work that the internal auditors routinely perform (primarily auditing versus primarily consulting), and audit task subjectivity (objective tests of controls versus subjective inventory valuation). Our results suggest that the nature of internal auditors' compensation and work affect audit planning recommendations differently. The opportunity to receive incentive compensation results in less reliance on internal auditors' work and greater budgeted audit hours, but only for the subjective task. Although a consulting role decreases perceived internal auditor objectivity, it has a limited effect on planning recommendations. Specifically, consulting has no effect on reliance, and leads to greater budgeted audit hours only when incentive compensation is available. We discuss potential explanations for the results as well as implications for audit research, practice, and regulation.