This paper discusses two forecasting experiments involving models of the watermelon market. The first experiment compares the forecasts of an interdependent model estimated by limited information, single equation with those of a model using least squares reduced form. The second experiment compares the forecasts of the interdependent model with those of a causal chain model. It is found that the forecasts of the interdependent model are generally better than those of the alternative models.

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.

Contrary to previous studies, we find managers change depreciation policies in predictable ways. We identify three dimensions of depreciation-policy changes: whether it is a method change or an estimate revision; whether it is income-increasing or decreasing; and whether it applies to new assets only or both new and existing assets. This disaggregation leads to three findings: First, a 1981 tax law altered the frequency of estimate revisions and method changes. Second, firms adopting income-increasing method changes for all assets experience worse performance than those adopting such changes only for new assets. Finally, non-income-increasing policy changes are associated with changes in investment opportunities.

We provide a positive analysis of a firm's decision to report the operations of a financial subsidiary on a consolidated versus an unconsolidated basis. Our evidence indicates that the firm is more likely to choose consolidated reporting the greater the operating, financial, and informational interdependencies between parent and subsidiary. Moreover, our evidence offers no support for the FASB hypothesis that firms use unconsolidated financial subsidíaries to understate the fixed claims on their balance sheets.

Until 1974, firms could capitalize or expense all or part of their research and development (R&D) costs. Managerial choice between these two alternatives is hypothesized to be affected by the existence of debt covenants which employ accounting numbers relating to leverage, interest coverage, and ability to pay dividends. In addition, the use of public versus private debt is hypothesized to affect the accounting choice due to differential renegotiation costs. Lastly, a political cost hypothesis is tested. This study uses a multivariate statistical technique, the generalized jackknife. The results suggest that firms which capitalized R&D costs were more highly levered, used more public debt, were closer to dividend restrictions, and were smaller than firms which expensed R&D costs.

In the Sixties, the qualified stock option was the predominant form of long-term incentive compensation contract for major industrial firms in the U.S. In the early Seventies these same firms replaced their tax-qualified stock option plans with non-qualified sttock options and later modified these plans to include a variety of new contingent compensation arrangements, some of which were based on accounting numbers instead of stock prices. This paper develops the hypothesis that tax considerations play an important role in explaining the form of compensation contracts. The pattern and timing of changes in the compensation plans of the top 100 industrial firms provides evidence consistent with the tax hypothesis.

This paper is designed to provide additional evidence on the positive theory of accounting policy choice by combining individual accounting principles into firm income strategies. These strategies were the dependent variable in a probit analysis where the independent variables were size, management compensation, industry concentration ratio, systematic risk, capital intensity and the total debt to total asset ratio. The results indicate that four of these factors (size, management compensation, concentration ratio, and the total debt to total asset ratio) have a significant association with the choice of a firm's income strategy. This test provides strong evidence consistent with the positive theory of accounting standard setting/choice. We also present evidence that smaller firms and/or firms in less concentrated industries do not appear to make accounting policy choice decisions that are consistent with this theory.