The Impact of Discretionary Measurement Criteria on Investors’ Judgement and Decisions

This study investigates the effect on nonprofessional investors’ judgements and decisions of discretionary measurement choices. Using a paper-and-pencil experience, we collect and analyze information regarding investment amounts as well as past and future financial performance judgements of firms’ earnings by manipulating fair value (mark-to-market and mark-to-model) criteria and benchmarking it with historical cost-based financial statements. We proxy nonprofessional investors with graduate students from a business school. Our results show evidence that nonprofessional investors view fair value changes as permanent. We argue for a cashflow volatility factor. Contrary to previous research, we do not find evidence of any effect on investors’ willingness to invest (average budget amounts invested) or performance judgments (past and future). We corroborate previous evidence that investors rank measurement concepts’ relevance differently for different classes, although, on average, mark-to-market fair values and historical cost are rated more relevant and reliable than mark-to-model fair values.

Is an Emoji Worth a Thousand Words? The Effect of Emoji Usage on Nonprofessional Investors’ Perceptions

Emojis act as non-verbal cues to disambiguate and communicate affect and are increasingly used in online corporate disclosures. Emotion work, a concept founded in social psychology, suggests that individuals adjust their behavior as emotions are evoked or suppressed. Despite the growing evidence that emojis may influence judgments and decisions due to their deliberate expression of context and affect, the accounting research community has yet to investigate emojis’ impact. We experimentally explore whether emojis can soften nonprofessional investors’ perceptions of bad news or enhance perceptions of good news. We find that emojis modestly suppress participants’ positive emotions on positive news, influencing their investment-related judgments and decision-making. Subsequent data collection fails to replicate the initial findings in a less experienced participant pool, suggesting that investing experience may play a role. Our study enhances our understanding of the unintended consequences of emojis and introduces a sociology-based principle into the accounting literature.

Changing the blame game: Does the presence of a pay ratio disclosure impact nonprofessional investors’ reactions to CEOs’ internal attributions for poor firm performance?

We conduct two experiments to investigate how the presence of the CEO pay ratio, a recently mandated disclosure, influences nonprofessional investors’ reactions to a CEO’s internal attributions for poor firm performance. Results of our first experiment suggest that relative to blaming oneself, blaming other firm employees for poor firm performance more effectively absolves a CEO from responsibility for poor firm performance and damages perceptions of the CEO’s trustworthiness less when a pay ratio disclosure is present versus absent. These perceptions, in turn, affect investors’ support for the CEO’s compensation and the company’s attractiveness as an investment. Our second experiment provides evidence of the underlying process, showing the pay ratio disclosure and the CEO’s attribution to other employees affects the perceived status of a CEO. Together, our findings inform managers about the impact of their attributions for poor firm performance and regulators about potential unintended consequences of pay ratio disclosures.

Uncovering Retail Trading in Bitcoin: The Impact of COVID-19 Stimulus Checks

In April 2020, the US government sent economic impact payments (EIPs) directly to households, as part of its measures to address the COVID-19 pandemic. We characterize these stimulus checks as a wealth shock for households and examine their effect on retail trading in Bitcoin. We find a significant increase in Bitcoin buy trades for the modal EIP amount of $1,200. The rise in Bitcoin trading is highest among individuals without families and at exchanges catering to nonprofessional investors. We estimate that the EIP program has a significant but modest effect on the US dollar–Bitcoin trading pair, increasing trade volume by about 3.8 percent. Trades associated with the EIPs result in a slight rise in the price of Bitcoin of 7 basis points. Nonetheless, the increase in trading is small compared to the size of the stimulus check program, representing only 0.02 percent of all EIP dollars. We repeat our analysis for other countries with similar stimulus programs and find an increase in Bitcoin buy trades in these currencies. Our findings highlight how wealth shocks affect retail trading.

Blue and red in financial documents: the influence on attentional mechanisms and behavior

PurposeThis study investigates whether colors red or blue in financial disclosure documents (Key Investor Information Documents – KIIDs) affect attention distribution toward the visual stimulus and the perception of financial attractiveness of the products.Design/methodology/approachIn order to observe and measure financial consumers' visual attention, the unobtrusive methodology of eye-tracking is used on a sample of nonprofessional investors, applying an ecological protocol, through a cross-sectional design.FindingsFinancial information processing and visual attention distribution are influenced by the color of the KIID document, as red seems to attract attention, proxied by gazing behavior, more than blue. Red color, compared to blue, is also observed to push investors to rate the products as less financially attractive, especially when the product Risk Reward Profile is high.Practical implicationsThe findings highlight the role of the basic visual properties of documents conveying financial information, prompting to investigate the unconscious and automatic mechanisms of individual's attention and its influence on decision making.Originality/valueUsing the eye-tracking tool, this study bridges neuroscience, color research, marketing and finance and provides new knowledge on the underlying neural mechanisms of financial consumers' behavior.

Nonfinancial Measures and Fraud Risk:Evaluating Investors’ Reactions to Greater Transparency

We examine whether increased transparency in the comparison of financial measures and nonfinancial measures (NFMs) influences nonprofessional investors’ reactions to the risk of fraudulent financial reporting. We consider a comparison of key financial measures and NFMs to be transparent when the relevant information is presented in close proximity and formatted to provide an easy comparison of the individual measures. We manipulate the presence of an NFM red flag and the transparency of the comparison of financial measures and NFMs. We find that when the NFM red flag is present (i.e., higher fraud risk) and transparent, investors choose lower investment levels. However, without increased transparency, as is typical in the current reporting environment, we observe that investors are more likely to increase their investment levels in firms with elevated fraud risk. Additionally, we observe that the effect of transparency on investment levels is driven by investors with greater investing experience.