Appendix 3.(Text subsection: Index studies with user inputs)

Author(s): Baker & Haslem (1973)

Sample Number - Source (dates): 1,623 individual investors - questionnaire (undated)

Method(s): Arithmetic means and standard deviations

Index: 33 items, based on pretested questionnaire

Findings: Individual investors use many items, especially to assist in the anticipation process.

Author(s): Chandra (1974)

Sample Number - Source (dates): 600 CPAs and 400 CFAs - questionnaire (undated)

Method(s): Pairwise comparison of ratings

Index: 58 items, based on literature, annual reports, professional analysts, accountants

Findings: The value of information in equity investment decisions differs between accountants and financial analysts.

Author(s): Benjamin & Stanga (1977)

Sample Number - Source (dates): 600 commercial bank loan officers, 600 CFAs - questionnaire (undated)

Method(s): Differences in rankings

Index: 79 items, based on literature and recent annual reports

Findings: For 51 of the 79 items, commercial bank officers, who make term loan decisions, and financial analysts, who make share investment decisions, value information differently.

Author(s): Kahl & Belkaoui (1981)

Sample Number - Source (dates): 70 commercial banks from 18 countries - annual reports (1975)

Method(s): Disclosure scores and disclosure consensus

Index: 30 weighted items, based on literature, judgment, professors, and CFAs

Findings: Differences exist in disclosure adequacy, internationally. U.S. banks are leaders in the extent of disclosure. A positive correlation exists between size and disclosure. There is a low consensus between producers and users on the ten disclosure items.

Author(s): McNally, Eng, & Hasseldine (1982)

Sample Number - Source (dates): 103 New Zealand Stock Exchange firms - annual reports (1979)

Method(s): Differences in disclosure scores

Index: 41 weighted items, based on literature, recent annual reports, and pilot-test by stockbrokers

Findings: Stockbrokers and financial editors perceive the voluntary disclosure of a wide variety of items of information to be important. There is divergence between the actual degree of disclosure provided by the firm and that degree of disclosure which is perceived by external users to be desirable. Size is related to voluntary disclosure.

Author(s): Firer & Meth (1986)

Sample Number - Source (dates): 36 Johannesburg Stock Exchange firms - annual reports (1979-83)

Method(s): Differences in disclosure scores

Index: 49 weighted items, based on literature, annual reports, and questionnaire for investment analysts and financial directors

Findings: Investment analysts place: (1) high importance on items that embody predictive information, (2) low importance on inflation related items, and (3) high importance on a statement of transactions in foreign currency. A low level of correlation between South African investment analysts and their U.K. counterparts is found.

Author(s): Wallace (1988)

Sample Number - Source (dates): 1,200 persons: 300 chartered accountants, 200 investors, 100 senior civil servants, 200 managers, 200 financial analysts, and 200 other professionals - questionnaire (1986)

Method(s): Disclosure scores and consensus among user-groups

Index: 109 items, based on literature, regulation, and degree of controversy surrounding the issue

Findings: The major finding of the study is the lack of consensus between accountants, as a user group, and all other user groups.

See the subsection of the text entitled: Index studies with user inputs for a discussion of this research area.

From Disclosure Indices to Business Communication: A Review of the Transformation by Schadewitz and Blevins