Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research: Volume 25

We investigate the relationship among the Dark Triad personality traits, ethical fading, and unethical behavior. Our findings suggest that Machiavellianism and psychopathy have a significant relationship with ethical fading such that individuals with high Machiavellianism are more likely to exhibit ethical fading, and individuals with high psychopathy are less likely to exhibit ethical fading. We do not find a significant association between narcissism and ethical fading. In the supplemental analyses, we investigate whether ethical fading leads to more unethical behavior (i.e., fraudulent reporting) and if it mediates the effect of Machiavellianism and psychopathy on unethical behavior. Our findings suggest that, while all the dark traits have a direct effect on unethical behavior, only Machiavellianism has an indirect effect that flows through ethical fading.

I use a controlled experiment to examine, in the context of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) crises, whether investors' investment judgments are influenced by a firm's CSR reputation and CSR crisis response strategy. I find that for good CSR reputation firms, the use of a rebuild or deny crisis response strategy does not lead to improvements in investment judgments. However, for bad CSR reputation firms, the use of a deny response strategy leads to improvements in investment judgments while the use of a rebuild strategy does not.

Prior research finds that auditors can be distinctively committed to multiple workplace targets (e.g., their audit firm, supervisors, profession, and clients). This study investigates an underexamined target of auditor commitment – engagement teams. Given that these teams are responsible for performing key audit tasks for clients and external stakeholders, we argue that auditors' commitment to their team can affect auditor behavior. Using a sample of 121 auditors, our results indicate that quality social exchange relationships between individual auditors and their engagement teams, activated by perceptions of team fairness, and reciprocated with team commitment, are associated with beneficial group-oriented behavior. Specifically, we posit and find that perceived team fairness predicts perceived team support, perceived team support predicts team commitment, and team commitment predicts citizenship behavior directed toward the engagement team (e.g., helping the team by taking on extra responsibilities during an audit). We also find that the social exchange proxies of perceived team support and team commitment sequentially mediate the positive effect of perceived team fairness on team citizenship behavior, and that team commitment is a stronger predictor of team citizenship behavior than auditors' commitment to their firm.

Investors frequently make judgments and decisions in the presence of affect (i.e., mood or emotion). Investors' moods may influence the extent to which they incorporate available financial information in their investment judgments. I propose that investors interpret their moods as signals of the extent to which financial information should be processed to make investment judgments, but only when other, more direct signals regarding the need for in-depth processing are unavailable. Consistent with research in psychology, my experimental results suggest that investors experiencing positive mood exert less effort to process available financial information than investors experiencing negative mood. Consequently, positive mood results in lower-quality financial judgments in my setting. However, when investors receive cues suggesting that initially received information is subjective, the effect of mood on effort to process financial information is mitigated. Overall, my results suggest that factors associated with positive investor mood (e.g., positive market sentiment) reduce the depth of investor analysis and lower judgment quality absent signals regarding the subjectivity of financial information.

Financial analysts' forecasts serve as a proxy for market earnings expectations, and research provides mixed evidence of the relation between financial analysts' expertise and forecast accuracy. The judgment and decision-making (J/DM) literature suggests that those with more expertise will not perform better when tasks exhibit either extremely high or extremely low complexity. Expertise is expected to contribute to superior performance for tasks between these two extremes. Using archival data, this research examines the effect of analysts' expertise on forecasting performance by taking into consideration the forecasting task's complexity. Results indicate that expertise is not an explanatory factor for forecast accuracy when the forecasting task's complexity is extremely high or low. However, when task complexity falls between these two extremes, expertise is a significant explanatory variable of forecast accuracy. Both results are consistent with our expectations.

This study provides evidence on the relationship between scale characteristics and participant responses for percentage-based scales (i.e., 101 points) in accounting research. A 4 × 1 between-subjects experiment examines how common labeling designs affect various statistical properties, including means, variance, normality of the distribution, and frequency of responses. The results indicate that labels on percentage-based scales have a significant impact on the distribution of participants' responses. Labeling only the endpoints is the lone condition that results in normally distributed data. Additional analyses suggest that labels on percentage-based scales influence participant responses in multiple ways. First, as the number of labels increases, participants may not adequately consider, and thus ultimately select, unlabeled points. Second, while participants seem to inherently interpret percentage-based scales in quartiles and deciles, labeling as such exacerbates this tendency. Finally, when more labels are present, participants seem to engage an anchoring heuristic when selecting their response. Taken as a whole, the results suggest that accounting researchers may benefit from labeling only the endpoints of percentage-based scales.

Given the ongoing attention surrounding public sector defined benefit pensions, the participating plan sponsors such as local units of government may be tempted to reduce their future pension liabilities, possibly at the expense of their former employees. Alternatively, public sector employees may act to withdraw their pension contributions if they have concerns related to the sustainability of their employer's pension plan. Nonvested, terminated employees have the option of leaving their contributions on account or taking them as a distribution in the form of a rollover to a qualifying retirement account, or a cash-out. Because a cash distribution carries with it the potential for retirement savings ‘leakage,’ it continues to be of public concern.

This study contributes to the literature by examining determinants of the distribution decisions of terminated employees and is first to specifically explore the association of pension funding levels as a determinant of such decision. Decisions of 46,608 employees who separated employment between 2010 and 2013 were examined. The results suggest that a decrease in the employer's pension funding is associated with increased probability that the terminated employee will take a refund of their contributions. Additionally, the data reveal that 88% of the terminating employees who took a refund requested to receive it in the form of a cash-out, totaling about $38 million of cash distributions. Lastly, about 1,000 of those employees each cashed out more than $8,000, thus suggesting the pension leakage problem warrants further research and perhaps policy changes.

This study examines whether the source from which nonprofessional investors obtain corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure influences their investment-related judgments and decisions and whether that influence depends on the company's financial performance. In an experiment, we find an asymmetrical effect of information source that varies with financial performance. In particular, information source affects investors' management credibility judgments when the firm announces unfavorable earnings result but not when the announced result is favorable. The mediation analysis reveals that investors' management credibility judgments mediate the joint effect of information source and financial performance on investors' investment decisions. Our findings highlight that the effectiveness of CSR communication can be complicated and that investors are sensitive to other factors that exist in the communication setting, such as the context in which CSR is disclosed (contextual factor) and information source of CSR disclosures (attributional factor).

Outside influences affect the progression of research in any discipline, including accounting. These influences offer one explanation for problems of replicability or comparability to previous studies, a common concern today. This article examines “who” participates in behavioral experiments and surveys involving accountants. This issue is important because of nontrivial differences in the composition of those in the accounting profession (and thus, participants in subject pools) over approximately 50 years of behavioral accounting research. Based on the theory of individual differences, we explore whether differences in the population of accounting research participants through the years could impact the replication or comparability of current-day research to earlier studies.

Our reading of available literature suggests that our profession has become more diverse in terms of gender and country of origin and that the oft-referenced characteristics of the millennial generation may also represent a distinct difference from previous generations of accountants. We discuss instances in which this changing nature of our profession, and thus our research population, could have implications for current-day behavioral accounting research.

We use a laboratory experiment to examine a multitask environment common to practice, in which managers have multiple responsibilities, including both managerial reporting, as in participative budgeting settings, and effort provision toward daily tasks. Consistent with typical contracting arrangements, we examine incomplete contracts where honesty and effort are not enforceable. In such a multitask environment, when employers choose to offer comparatively generous wages to managers, we predict that managers will elect to provide higher effort. Meanwhile, we remain agnostic ex ante about the degree of misreporting due to findings in studies on gift exchange, moral licensing, and moral wiggle room. Overall, we find evidence that reciprocity, consistent with the gift-exchange model, does extend across both tasks. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

This study uses an eye-tracking device to examine the effects of dissenting opinion on information search style and decision quality, using insights from dual-process theory. When evaluating strategic outcomes, managers not exposed to a dissenting opinion employ directed information search using System 1 (heuristic, automatic cognitive processing), leading to low-quality decisions. Providing a dissenting opinion causes managers to use System 2 (sequential information search characterized by deliberate, slow, and effortful cognitive processing), leading to higher-quality decisions. This study provides useful insights into the cognitive processes underlying managers' judgments, and the factors that influence their decisions. We conclude by discussing the critical role of dissent in business practices, and explain how dissent affects people's System 2 cognitive processes.