Dynamic Games of Firm Social Media Disclosure

Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 758)

Abstract

Firm social media disclosure is a complex game. This paper proposes three stages dynamic games model to analysis the process of social media information disclose. In the first stage model, firms disclose on social media because of low cost and high income, and this can make firms obtain more attention in competition. We introduced investors in the second stage model. Firms disclose exaggeratedly in order to get more benefits from investors in the complete information static game. And investors would not believe social media disclosures and not invest. When reputation model of KMRW is introduced in this stage, the model becomes repeated game with incomplete information. If the game is repeated enough times, the cooperative equilibrium can be achieved. But investors always act in the short run and the model of KMRW does not work. So, the external regulators are introduced in the third stage model. If the benefits which firms get from exaggerated disclosure can be given to the investors through punishment mechanism firms finally disclose truly on social media.

Keywords

Disclosure Social media Dynamic games 

References

  1. Blankespoor, E., Miller, G.S., White, H.D.: The role of dissemination in market liquidity: evidence from firms’ use of twitter. Acc. Rev. 89(1), 79–112 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boritz, J.E., No, W.G.: Security in XML-based financial reporting services on the internet 24(1), 11–35 (2005)Google Scholar
  3. Bushee, B.J., Core, J., Guay, W., Hamm, S.: The role of the business press as an information intermediary. J. Accunt. Res. 48(1), 1–19 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Depken, C.A., Zhang, Y.: Adverse selection and reputation in a world of cheap talk. Q. Rev. Econ. Financ. 50(4), 548–558 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ecker, F., Francis, J., Kim, I., Olsson, P.M., Schipper, K.: A returns-based representation of earnings quality. Accunt. Rev. 81(4), 749–780 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Healy, P.M., Palepu, K.G.: Information asymmetry, corporate disclosure, and the capital markets: a review of the empirical disclosure literature. J. Account. Econ. 31(1), 405–440 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Heinle, M.S., Verrecchia, R.E.: Bias and the commitment to disclosure. Manage. Sci. 60(10), 2859–2870 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Heverin, T., Zach, L.: Twitter for city police department information sharing. Proc. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 47(1), 1–7 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hodge, F.D., Kennedy, J.J., Maines, L.A.: Does search-facilitating technology improve the transparency of financial reporting? Account. Rev. 79(3), 687–703 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hooghiemstra, R., Hermes, N., Emanuels, J.: National culture and internal control disclosures: a cross-country analysis. Corp. Gov. Int. Rev. 23(4), 357–377 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Koonce, L., Seybert, N., Smith, J.: Management speaks, investors listen: are investors too focused on managerial disclosures. J. Behav. Financ. 17(1), 31–44 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lang, M.H., Lundholm, R.J.: Voluntary disclosure and equity offerings: reducing information asymmetry or hyping the stock. Contemp. Account. Res. 17(4), 623–662 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mahito, O.: An economic analysis of coopetitive training investments for insurance agents. Commun. Comput. Inf. Sci. 300(4), 571–577 (2012)Google Scholar
  14. Muiño, F., Núñez-Nickel, M.: Multidimensional competition and corporate disclosure. J. Bus. Financ. Account. 43(3–4), 298–328 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Welker, M.: Disclosure policy, information asymmetry, and liquidity in equity markets. Contemp. Account. Res. 11(2), 801–827 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Zhang, J.H.: Voluntary information disclosure on social media. Decis. Support Syst. 73(2), 28–36 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Verrecchia, R.E.: Discretionary disclosure. J. Account. Econ. 5(1), 179–194 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Economics and ManagementFuzhou UniversityFuzhouChina
  2. 2.School of AccountingFujian Jiangxia UniversityFuzhouChina
  3. 3.The Co-operators General Insurance CompanyMarkhamCanada

Personalised recommendations