Skip to main content
Log in

How Do Information Ambiguity and Timing of Contextual Information Affect Managers’ Goal Congruence in Making Investment Decisions in Good Times vs. Bad Times?

  • Published:
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Information ambiguity is prevalent in organizations and may influence management decisions. This study draws upon research on information bias and ambiguity research to empirically test how information ambiguity and non-financial factors (e.g., interpersonal information) affect managers’ capital budgeting decisions when in good vs. bad times. Ninety-two managers completed two experiments. In Experiment One, the information was presented sequentially. Our results show that without the presence of non-financial factors, managers tend to maximize the firm value. After receiving non-financial factors, a significant number of managers switched to the self-serving option in good times (the gain condition) but stayed with firm-value maximization in bad times (the loss condition). In Experiment Two, the information was presented simultaneously in the presence and absence of ambiguity. We found that in the presence of ambiguity, the information presentation has no impact on managers’ self-serving bias in good times or their firm-value maximization tendency in bad times. Interestingly, we also observed managers’ use of interpersonal information even in the absence of ambiguity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Berry, A. J. (1984). “The Control of Capital Investment,” Journal of Management Studies 21(1), 61–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booth, P. and A. K.-D. Schulz. (2004). “The Impact of an Ethical Environment on Managers’ Project Evaluation Judgments Under Agency Problem Conditions,” Accounting, Organizations and Society 29(5/6), 473–488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bower, J. L. (1986). Managing the Resource Allocation Process 2nd ed. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, E. H. (1982). “Risk Seeking by Troubled Firms,” Sloan Management Review 23(4), 33–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curley, S. P. and J. F. Yates. (1985). “The Center and Range of the Probability Interval as Factors Affecting Ambiguity Preferences,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 36, 273–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demski, J. S. (1997). Managerial Uses of Accounting Information, Kluwer Academic Publsihers.

  • Einhorn, H. J. and R. M. Hogarth. (1985). “Ambiguity and Uncertainty in Probabilistic Inference,” Psychological Review 92(4), 433–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fatemi, A. M., J. S. Ang, and J. H. Chua. (1983). “Evidence Supporting Shareholder Wealth Maximization in Management Controlled Firms,” Applied Economics 15, 49–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feltham, G. A. and J. Xie. (1994). “Performance measure congruity and Diversity in Multi-Task Principal/Agent Relations,” The Accounting Review 69(3) 429–453.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonzales-Vallejo, C., A. Bonazzi, and A. J. Shapiro. (1996). “Effects of Vague Probabilities and of Vague Payoffs on Preference: A Model Comparison Analysis,” Journal of Mathematical Psychology 40, 130–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heerema, D. L. and R. L. Rogers. (1991). “Is Your Cost Accounting System Benching Your Team Players?” Management Accounting (Sept.), 35–40.

  • Ho, J. L. Y., L. R. Keller, and P. Keltyka. (2002). “Effects of Outcome and Probabilistic Ambiguity on Managerial Choices,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 24(1), 47–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, J. L. Y., L. R. Keller, and P. Keltyka. (2001). “Managers’ Variance Investigation Decisions: An Experimental Examination of Probabilistic and Outcome Ambiguity,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 14, 257– 278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, J. L. Y. and S. C. Vera-Munoz. (2001). “Opportunism in Capital Budget Recommendations: The Effects of Past Performance and Its Attributions,” Decision Sciences 32(3), 423–447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogarth, R. M. and H. Kunreuther. (1989). “Risk, ambiguity and insurance,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 2, 5–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horngren, C. T., G. Foster, and S. M. Datar. (1997). Cost Accounting, 9th edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsee, C. K. (1995). “Elastic Justification: How Tempting But Task-Irrelevant Factors Influence Decisions,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 62(3), 330–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsee, C. K. (1996). “Elastic Justification: How Unjustifiable Factors Influence Judgments,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 66(1), 122–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kachelmeier, S. J. and M. Shehata. (1994). “Examining Risk Preferences Under High Monetary Incentives,” The American Economic Review (September), 1105–1106.

  • Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky. (1979). “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk,” Econometrica 47, 263–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky. (1984). “Choices, Values and Frames,” American Psychologist 29(4), 3441– 350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keppel, G. (1991). Design and Analysis 3rd edition, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kida, T., K. Moreno, and J. F. Smith. (2001). “The Influence of Affect on Managers’ Capital Budgeting Decisions,” Contemporary Accounting Research 18(3), 477–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleinmuntz, B. and D. Kleinmuntz. (2003). “Multiobjective Capital Budgeting in Not-for-Profit Hospitals and Healthcare Systems,” Working paper. University of Illinois.

  • Kuhn, K. M. and D. V. Budescu. (1996). “The relative Importance of Probabilities, Outcomes, and Vagueness in Hazard Risk Decisions,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 68, 301–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kunreuther, H. (1989). “The Role of Actuaries and Underwriters Insuring Risks: The Case of Environmental Pollution Liability Coverage,” Risk Analysis 9, 319–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunreuther, H., J. Meszaros, R. M. Hogarth, and M. Spranca. (1995). “Ambiguity and Underwriter Decision Processes,” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 26, 337–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laughhunn, D. J., J. Payne, and R. Crum. (1980). “Managerial Risk Preferences for Below-Target Returns,” Management Science 26(12), 1238–1249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreno, K., T. Kida and J. F. Smith. (2002). “The Impact of Affective Reactions on Riskyh Decision Making in Accounting Contexts,” Journal of Accounting Research 40(5), 1331–1350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morse, D. C. and J. L. Zimmerman. (1997). Managerial Accounting, Chicago: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mukherjee, T. K. and G. V. Henderson. (1987). “The Capital Budgeting Process: Theory and Practice,” Interfaces 17(2), 78–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, B. L. (1972). “A Study of Confidence Interval Financial Statements,” Journal of Accounting Research 10, 154–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinches, G. E. (1982). “Myopia, Capital Budgeting and Decision Making,” Financial Management (Autumn), 6–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raiborn, C. A., J. T. Barfield, and M. R. Kinney. (1999). Managerial Accounting, 3rd ed., Cincinnati: South-Western College Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reimann, B. C. 1990. “A Session for Students of Shareholder Value Creation,” Planning Review (May-June), 42–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruhl, J. M. and S. S. Cowen. (1992). “Breaking the Barriers to Value Creation,” Management Accounting (March), 44–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, J.E., M.G. Meloy, and T.J. Wilks. (2000). “Predecisional Distortion of Information by Auditors and Salespersons,” Management Science 46, 13–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scapens, R. W. and J. T. Sale. (1981). “Performance Measurement and Formal Capital Expenditure Controls in Divisionalized Companies,” Journal of Business Finance and Accounting 8, 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thackray, J. (1985). “America’s Management Mischief,” Management Today (Feb.)(80–84), 112–117.

  • Viscusi, W. K. and H. Chesson. (1999). “Hopes and Fears: The Conflicting Effects of Risk Ambiguity,” Theory and Decision 47, 153–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viscusi, W. K. and W. A. Magat. (1992). “Bayesian Decisions with Ambiguous Belief Aversion,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5, 371–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, J. (1997). Accounting for Decision Making and Control, 2nd edition, Chicago, IL: Irwin-McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to L. Robin Keller.

Additional information

JEL Classification: D8

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ho, J.L.Y., Keller, L.R. & Keltyka, P. How Do Information Ambiguity and Timing of Contextual Information Affect Managers’ Goal Congruence in Making Investment Decisions in Good Times vs. Bad Times?. J Risk Uncertainty 31, 163–186 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-005-3553-8

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-005-3553-8

Keywords

Navigation