Abstract
This research investigates how fraudulent companies differ in their narrative disclosure strategies across multiple reporting venues. Fraudulent companies must avoid discussing fraud-relevant items, or they must present a fabricated version of their story. To reduce involuntary information disclosure and attempt to convince their audience that what they say is true, fraudulent firms may have greater language similarity than non-fraudulent firms between their quarterly earnings calls and the subsequent Management’s Discussion & Analysis section of the quarterly financial statement. I measure language similarity between a company’s earnings calls and their corresponding financial statements. I find that the Chief Financial Officers of fraudulent companies have significantly higher language similarity between disclosure venues than their non-fraudulent peers. I also test the predictive ability of these measures using several classification schemes, achieving fraud-detection accuracy levels between 53% and 71%. The paper concludes with a discussion of the findings and avenues for future research.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
I use Accounting & Auditing Enforcement Releases (AAERs) to establish ground truth.
- 2.
Open-source machine learning software, available at www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/ml/weka/
References
Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. (2013, August). The SEC’s newest tool is headed to the front. Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. http://www.acfe.com/fraud-examiner.aspx?id=4294979300
Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. (2014). Report to the nations on occupational fraud and abuse: 2014 global fraud study. Association of Certified Fraud Examiners.
Bloomfield, R. (2012). Discussion of detecting deceptive discussions in conference calls. Journal of Accounting Research, 50(2), 541–552.
Brown, S. V., & Tucker, J. W. (2011). Large-sample evidence on firms’ year-over-year MD&A modifications. Journal of Accounting Research, 49(2), 309–346.
Buller, D. B., & Burgoon, J. K. (1996). Interpersonal deception theory. Communication Theory, 6(3), 203–242.
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1989). Effects of message repetition on argument processing, recall, and persuasion. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 10(1), 3–12.
Cecchini, M., Aytug, H., Koehler, G. J., & Pathak, P. (2010). Detecting management fraud in public companies. Management Science, 56(7), 1146–1160.
Davis, A. K., & Tama-Sweet, I. (2012). Managers’ use of language across alternative disclosure outlets: Earnings press releases versus MD&A. Contemporary Accounting Research, 29(3), 804–837.
Dechow, P. M., Ge, W., Larson, C. R., & Sloan, R. G. (2011). Predicting material accounting misstatements. Contemporary Accounting Research, 28(1), 17–82.
Dyck, A., Morse, A., & Zingales, L. (2010). Who blows the whistle on corporate fraud? The Journal of Finance, 65(6), 2213–2253.
Dyck, A., Morse, A., & Zingales, L. (2013). How pervasive is corporate fraud? Rotman School of Management Working Paper, 2222608.
Gaganis, C. (2009). Classification techniques for the identification of falsified financial statements: A comparative analysis. Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, 16(3), 207–229.
Godfrey, J., Mather, P., & Ramsay, A. (2003). Earnings and impression management in financial reports: The case of CEO changes. Abacus, 39(1), 95–123.
Hoberg, G., & Lewis, C. (2014). Do fraudulent firms strategically manage disclosure? SSRN, 2298302. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2298302
Humpherys, S. L., Moffitt, K. C., Burns, M. B., Burgoon, J. K., & Felix, W. F. (2011). Identification of fraudulent financial statements using linguistic credibility analysis. Decision Support Systems, 50(3), 585–594.
Karpoff, J. M., Lee, D. S., & Martin, G. S. (2008). The cost to firms of cooking the books. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 43(3), 581–611.
Karpoff, J. M., Koester, A., Lee, D. S., & Martin, G. S. (2012). A critical analysis of databases used in financial misconduct research. Mays Business School Research Paper, 2012–73, 2012–11.
Larcker, D. F., & Zakolyukina, A. A. (2012). Detecting deceptive discussions in conference calls. Journal of Accounting Research, 50(2), 495–540.
Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin, 107(1), 34.
Lee, J. (2016). Can investors detect managers’ lack of spontaneity? Adherence to predetermined scripts during earnings conference calls. The Accounting Review, 91(1), 229–250.
Lo, K., & Rogo, R. (2014). Earnings management and annual report readability. Working Paper.
Loughran, T., & McDonald, B. (2011). When is a liability not a liability? Textual analysis, dictionaries, and 10-Ks. The Journal of Finance, 66(1), 35–65.
Manning, C. D., Raghavan, P., & Schutze, H. (2008). Introduction to information retrieval. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Matsumoto, D., Pronk, M., & Roelofsen, E. (2011). What makes conference calls useful? The information content of managers’ presentations and analysts’ discussion sessions. The Accounting Review, 86(4), 1383–1414.
Mayew, W. J., Sethuraman, M., & Venkatachalam, M. (2016). “Casting” a doubt: Informational role of analyst participation during earnings conference calls.
Merkl-Davies, D. M., & Brennan, N. (2007). Discretionary disclosure strategies in corporate narratives: Incremental information or impression management? Journal of Accounting Literature, 26, 116–196.
Merkl-Davies, D. M., Brennan, N. M., & McLeay, S. J. (2011). Impression management and retrospective sense-making in corporate narratives: A social psychology perspective. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 24(3), 315–344.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1979). Effects of message repetition and position on cognitive response, recall, and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(1), 97–109.
Purda, L., & Skillicorn, D. (2015). Accounting variables, deception, and a bag of words: Assessing the tools of fraud detection. Contemporary Accounting Research, 32, 1193–1223. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12089.
Walczyk, J. J., Mahoney, K. T., Doverspike, D., & Griffith-Ross, D. A. (2009). Cognitive lie detection: Response time and consistency of answers as cues to deception. Journal of Business and Psychology, 24(1), 33–49.
Zhou, L., & Zhang, D. (2008). Following linguistic footprints: Automatic deception detection in online communication. Communications of the ACM, 51(9), 119–122.
Acknowledgement
We are grateful to the Army Research Office for funding much of the work reported in this book under Grant W911NF-16-1-0342.
Funding Disclosure
This research was funded in part by a grant from the Center for Leadership Ethics at the University of Arizona.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Spitzley, L. (2021). Incremental Information Disclosure in Qualitative Financial Reporting: Differences Between Fraudulent and Non-fraudulent Companies. In: Subrahmanian, V.S., Burgoon, J.K., Dunbar, N.E. (eds) Detecting Trust and Deception in Group Interaction. Terrorism, Security, and Computation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54383-9_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54383-9_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-54382-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-54383-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)