.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Return
Do restatements generate contagion? A re-examination
.png){kind=icon}
PRE
AI
M
T
M
DOI：10.1007/s11142-026-09979-8.png)
.png){kind=icon}
Original request for help.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
Studies provide conflicting evidence on what accounting restatements reveal about industry peers. Gleason et al. (2008) suggest that restatements reflect contemporaneous earnings management, while Kedia et al. (2015) argue that restatements induce peers to begin misstating earnings. We re-examine peers’ reporting responses to restatements and find that the results of Kedia et al. (2015) are sensitive to design choices that affect the measurement of key variables. When this measurement error is minimized, we find no evidence that peers begin misstating following restatements. Using nonrestatement-based measures, we find that peers exhibit less aggressive reporting, especially when prior accrual use is high and when peers share the same auditor office. Overall, industry peers do not appear to increase earnings management following restatements. Instead, restatements primarily reflect contemporaneous misreporting and, in some cases, lead to less aggressive reporting by peers.
Keywords:
Restatements
Misstatement
Earnings management
Peer firm reporting
Contagion
Social networks theory
Journal
IF:
5.8
Papers:
1.0K
Citations:
6.4K
Organization
Cited Papers