返回
Assets and Liabilities: When Do They Exist?
DOI:10.1111/1911-3846.12479.png)
摘要
En 中文
In this paper, we investigate whether the current references to probability in standard setters' conceptual definitions of assets and liabilities cause individuals to believe that the probability of a future transfer of economic benefits must be above some meaningful threshold for an asset or a liability to exist-a belief that is contrary to standard setters' intent. Results of multiple experiments indicate that the majority of individuals do use a high probability threshold to determine asset existence, whereas for liabilities the majority use a very low threshold. Thus, even under ceteris paribus conditions, liabilities are more frequently judged to exist than assets-a phenomenon analogous to accounting conservatism, as has been discussed in terms of the performance statement. These findings are robust to variation in formal training and in type of liability, and cannot be explained by alternative approaches to judging existence. Consistent with standard setters' intentions, results also suggest that their proposed changes to the definitions of assets and liabilities-changes that attempt to clarify the intended role of probability-do cause a greater proportion of participants to indicate that the relevant financial statement element (asset or liability) exists, relative to participants with no definition. Our study provides important insights for standard setters as they continue work on their missions to update their Conceptual Frameworks and for researchers regarding the role of conservatism on the balance sheet.
Keyword:
PSYCHOLOGY
QUALITY
AI总结
对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取,主要内容包括:简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。
期刊
IF:
3.8
论文数:
1.5K
被引数:
8.9K
机构
引用论文
Gender Differences in Reading Impairment and in the Identification of Impaired Readers阅读障碍和受损读者识别中的性别差异
ASYMMETRICAL EFFECTS OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE EVENTS - THE MOBILIZATION MINIMIZATION HYPOTHESIS
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN
IF19.8

