Financial Reporting Quality on Investors? Decisions

International Journal of Economics
and Financial Research
ISSN(e): 2411-9407, ISSN(p): 2413-8533
Vol. 2, No. 7, pp: 140-147, 2016
URL: http://arpgweb.com/?ic=journal&journal=5&info=aims
*Corresponding Author
140
Academic Research Publishing Group
Financial Reporting Quality on Investors’ Decisions
Nwaobia A. N. Department of Accounting, School of Management Sciences, Babcock University, Ikenne, Nigeria
Kwarbai J. D.*
Department of Accounting, School of Management Sciences, Babcock University, Ikenne, Nigeria
Jayeoba, O. O. Department of Accounting, School of Management Sciences, Babcock University, Ikenne, Nigeria
Ajibade A. T. Department of Accounting, School of Management Sciences, Babcock University, Ikenne, Nigeria
1. Introduction
Financial and accounting literature provide evidence that the quality of financial information increases volume
of investment, (Brown and Hillegeist, 2007; Jaballah et al., 2014). It is evident that investors and analysts seek
disclosures of forward-looking information, such as perfomacne projections, and they tend to invest in and provide
coverage of companies that have more forthcoming disclosure policies, (Ajinkya et al., 2005; Chang et al., 2008;
Mehdi et al., 2012; Tetlock, 2011).
Brown and Hillegeist (2007) equally opined that disclosure increases the trading of both uninformed and
informed investors since it diminishes asymmetric information. They find a strong positive correlation between the
quality of financial reporting and market reaction.
According to Bolo and Hassani (2007), financial reporting is one of the products of accounting system that
provides the necessary information needed to take economic decisions. This means that any element(s) of ensuring
the possibility of evaluating the past performance with the intention to effectively assess and predict the possible
future profitability should be considered as a prerequisite for achieving a high volume of investment.
The observed limitations of financial reporting have led to enhancing the scope of the generally accepted
accounting principles and now the international financial reporting standards. Kariuki and Jagongo (2013) posit that
this limitation has paved way for the new reporting standards now released by International Accounting Standards
Board (IASB) to reflect the changes in either the reporting environment or business complexities. We can infer from
the above assessment that the idea of the recent policies and standards is to reduce information asymmetry by
providing more information on the value of the performance, growth and stability of the firms, thereby reducing
adverse selection at the issuance of securities (Bushman and Smith, 2001) and or mitigate the attendant moral hazard
(Healy P. M. and Palepu, 2001; Santhosh et al., 2013).
Our study is related to so many works, but distinct from, prior studies that examine the effect of Financial
Reporting Quality (FRQ) on investment efficiency (Biddle and Hilary, 2006; Biddle et al., 2009). These studies
Abstract: Financial reporting quality has been said to play an important role in reducing information
asymmetry. Thus, firms with high financial reporting quality may enhance more investors’ decision. Hence, the
basic objective of this study is to determine whether earnings quality influence investors’ decision. The sample
consisted of 10 manufacturing companies listed on the Nigerian Stock Exchange Market. The study period is 5
years (2010-2014). Data on accrual quality, volume of investment, Size, age and growth rate and earnings per
share were drawn from the published annual report and accounts of the sampled companies. Correlation matrix,
Vector auto regressive estimation and Pooled OLS model were employed for the analysis. Diagnostic tests for
post estimation were also performed on the model. The result of the Ramsey Reset test shows a p-value of
0.2105, implying that model has no omitted variables. Also, Wooldridge test for autocorrelation in panel data
indicates no first-order autocorrelation, showing a p-value of 0.3642. We calculated accruals quality based on
the modified accrual model proposed by Mac Nichols in 2002. In this paper, the absolute value of residual error
represents the financial reporting quality. This threshold is based on the idea that accruals reduce the smoothing
initiated by the change in the cash flow and thus increase the earnings awareness. The study finds evidence of a
positive association between investors’ decision and financial reporting quality.
Keywords: Quality; Size; Information; Asymmetry; Financial reporting; Accrual.

International Journal of Economics and Financial Research, 2016, 2(7): 140-147
141
examined whether high quality financial reporting improves investment efficiency but did not consider the investors’
reaction to quality of financial reports in making their economic and investment decisions. More so, a good number
of researchers used the adoption of IFRS as proxy for earnings quality. This, in our view, might not be an
appropriate measure for earnings quality for yesterday, today and for the future. Based on our knowledge, there may
be limited academic papers which analyzed the relationship of FRQ and investors’ decision in the Nigerian context.
In this paper, we argue that financial reporting quality can and does impact on the investors’ decision. We analyze
the effects of financial reporting quality on the decision of investors to invest in companies listed on the Nigeria
Stock Exchange (NSE). First, in determining FRQ we use accrual method of measuring earnings quality used by
Dechow and Dichev (2002), and modified by McNichols and Stubben (2008) and Kothari et al. (2005). Secondly
we analyze the quality effect of financial reports on investors’ reaction in the Nigerian financial market. Thirdly, we
include firm age, size, growth and Earnings per share as control variables and analyze their influence on investors’
reaction in the market.
The main contribution of the paper is in filling the gaps in the literature as identified above. The paper is
organized into five sections including this introduction. Section 2 discusses review of literature and development of
hypothesis on the effects of financial reporting quality and investor decision. Section 3 explains the empirical
methodology, including the choice of variables and data issues. Estimation results are presented and discussed in
Section 4 and we concluded in Section 5.
2. Review of Literature
For accounting information to be useful, its timely communication to users of such information is paramount.
This communication is achieved by producing financial report and accounts. The major objective of financial
reporting as earlier identified is to provide high-quality accounting information concerning organizations’ activities
that is useful for making economic decisions (IASB, 2008).
Projection has particular importance in economic decisions. Investors’ decisions are based on expectations of
reasonable and stable returns on their investments in companies. They need information such as forecasted earnings
per share, which information they use in stock pricing, especially in newly-arrived companies that have little record
book. It is based on these forecasts that investors may sell their shares or keep them. For Mehdi et al. (2012), these
predictions are managers' expectations and anticipations of performance of companies that may occur in future and
upon these investors base their decision. Therefore, the accuracy of these predictions is the basic factor for investors.
In reality, profitability of prediction depends on variation from the fact. Whenever prediction accuracy is higher, this
deviation is lower. According to Dechow and Dichev (2002) many factors are involved in the deviation of actual
earning from predicted earning based on the accrual estimation. Seyed (2014) opined that one of these factors is the
quality of financial reporting which can facilitate the efficient allocation of capital in the economy. One of the most
important aspects of this fact is to improve the investment decisions.
According to Nyor (2013), financial reporting quality relates to the accuracy with which reported financials of a
firm reflects its operating performance and how useful they are in forecasting future cash flows. The ability to
present a good and accurate figure for accrual is termed as financial reporting quality. According to Stergios and
Michalis (2012) there are two general perspectives that are widely used in the assessment of financial reporting
quality. The first is where the quality of financial reporting is determined on the basis of the usefulness of the
financial information to its users; secondly the perspective of financial reporting quality is focused on the notion of
shareholder/investor protection. The user needs perspective is mainly concerned with the provision of relevant
information to users for making decisions, whereas the shareholder/investor protection perspective aims to ensure
that the information provided to users is sufficient for their needs, transparent and competent, (Jonas and Blanchet,
2000).
There are several studies on the quality of financial reporting quality such as Kariuki and Jagongo (2013) where
they determined the type of information in the financial reports that is regarded as very useful by the institutional
investors in Kenya. It was established that the biggest challenge that faces users of financial reports in Kenya is the
technical nature of language of presentation. Nyor (2013) evaluated the opinion of stakeholders on the quality of
firms’ financial statements in Nigeria and revealed that the quality of financial statement is in the increasing rate.
Beest et al. (2009) highlighted measurement tools to assess the quality of financial reporting used in prior research
with their advantages and disadvantages and they revealed that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. The
accrual model used by Jones (1991) ; Healy P. and Wahlen (1999) ; Dechow and Dichev (2002) examines the level
of earnings management as a proxy for earnings quality. The value relevance literature method is employed by Barth
et al. (2001) ; Choi et al. (1997) ; Nichols and Wahlen (2004) to examine the relationship between stock returns and
earnings figures in order to measure the relevance and reliability of financial reporting information. Hirst et al.
(2004) ; Beretta and Bozzolan (2004); Cohen et al. (2004) examine specific elements in the annual report in depth,
for instance, by conducting an experiment. The use of qualitative characteristics approach by Schipper and Vincent
(2003) ; Van der Meulen et al. (2007) ; Barth et al. (2001) examines the level of decision usefulness of financial
reporting information by operationalizing the qualitative characteristics.
2.1. Theoretical Development of Hypotheses
Agency theory and capital needs theory provide the platform on which the hypothesis of this paper is developed.
The objective of the firm is maximizing shareholders’ wealth. This objective is to be achieved by the corporate

142
firm’s management. Although managers are assumed to act not in their own self-interests at the expense of
shareholders but rather toward achieving the corporate objective. The separation of the role of managers from the
owners resulted in the need for financial reporting. According to Sheikh et al. (2012), conflict of interest may arise
in firms when managers’ personal interests override their obligations to comply with principal-agent contract of
maximizing shareholders wealth. Due to the need to present a better result to the owners and potential owners of the
firm, managers tend to engage in earnings management and subsequently reduce the overall quality of earnings
reported. Also, the constant need for capital via investor’s decision is one reason why managers present a better
picture of the financial position of the company. According to Core (2001), capital needs theory holds that
companies that have growth opportunities in the capital market strive to present qualitative financial reports with
adequate disclosures that will enhance their opportunities for external financing. Thus, financial reporting is the
appropriate tool to attract more capital from investors.
More so, the goal of investors is to maximize their wealth which means maximizing the present value of the
future cash flows. Their economic decision is a proxy of quality financial information. Hence, investors require
information that would enable them predict the future cash flow from the investments and the associated risks
volatility. (Kariuki and Jagongo, 2013). We therefore align with the position that financial reporting quality plays an
important role in reducing information asymmetry by providing more information on the value of the firm (Bushman
and Smith, 2001). Thus, firms with high financial reporting quality enhance more investor’s decision.
Trading volume is the number of purchase and sale transactions in an interval (a working day). Trading volume
or value of share traded might be a good measure to determine investors’ reaction based on the quality of report.
Hence, trading volume can be used as a tool in the market to realize what may be happening in the market.
(Johansson and Wilandh, 2005; Mehdi et al., 2012).
So we consider the hypothesis below:
H1: Financial Reporting Quality has no significant effect on Investors’ decisions to invest on shares of
companies listed on the Nigerian Stock Exchange Market (NSE)
We draw upon prior research to identify other factors that may be related to the quality of a firm's financial
reporting. In our empirical tests, we include these control variables and estimate whether the quality of financial
reporting affects investors’ decision.
We include some control variables namely: size of the firm, age of the firm, growth of the firm and earnings per
share history to moderate the firm characteristics. According to Biddle et al. (2009) such variables must be used to
control for the economics factors that influence a firm’s investment although in this case, investors’ decision. Hence,
we also examine how the control variables moderate the effect of the investor’s decision.
Age: Experience goes with technical skill, knowledge and competence and these tend to correlate positively
with management quality. There tend to be a relationship between industry-specific managerial experience and
innovations in different facets of a firm’s activities. It is costly to replicate firm-specific skills, knowledge and
relationships acquired and institutionalized over a period of time (Nwaobia et al., 2016). Thus, it is believed that
experience associated with age is likely to stabilize a company’s growth and performance. This study therefore,
argues that age gives an evidence of the stability of an establishment and investors are more likely to take risk in
such firms.
Age is taken to be the difference between the year when the firm was established and the year of study, that is,
2016 (Chan-Jane et al., 2015).
Size: It is believed that some larger firms have enough resources acquired over the years given them an edge
over smaller firms as they can engage in higher risks and effectively manage with a high expectation of result.
Khaoula et al. (2013) and Rego (2003) observe that larger firms can achieve economies of scale, and access loans
within a short period of time. Biddle et al. (2009) find evidence that large firms usually have higher sales than small
ones. Accordingly, the level of equity and debt are higher in large firms. Such levels provide strong evidence that
financial reports are more transparent and have stronger effect in these firms. This leads us to predict a positive
relationship between the firm size and the market reaction.
Growth of the firm: According to Beyer (2008) an investor wishes to transact with growing firms with
growing turnover. Then we can infer that adequate disclosure in growing firms have a higher impact on the market
than disclosures by mature firms. Chan-Jane et al. (2015).
Earnings per Share: In the imperfect market, dividend policy can affect investment decision of a firm
(Santhosh et al., 2013). Thus, firms with higher quality of financial reporting have better access to fund and so are
less likely to forgo valuable investment projects in order to pay dividend (Healy P. M. and Palepu, 2001). Some
studies find evidence consistent to dividend payout history and investor decision and conclude that investors expect
consistent returns from investment. Hence, Investors use earnings of the firm to predict future expected return
(Daniel et al., 2010). Looking at an individual stock's historical dividend payouts can give investors a good idea of
emerging dividend trends and it also provides insight into the company's overall dividend philosophy. No doubt, an
entity’s dividend philosophy largely depends on the consistency of its earnings.
3. Methodology
The ex-post facto research design was adopted in this study. As such, secondary data were extracted from the
annual reports and accounts of ten (10) companies for a period of 5 years (2010-2014). Purposive sampling method
was used to select the sampled firms from the total population of one hundred and eighty- six (186) firms listed on

143
the Nigerian Stock Exchange. To achieve the objective of this paper, three variables were identified and discussed in
this section. These are: dependent variable which is represented by volume of shares traded Independent variable of
Financial Reporting Quality (proxied by) earnings quality; and control variables of Age, growth rate, size and
Earnings per share. The measurement procedures of each of these variables are discussed as follows:
3.1. Measurement of Variables and Model Specification
3.1.1. Financial Reporting Quality (FRQ).
In determining the FRQ we adopted the accrual quality model of Dechow and Dichev (2002) modified by
McNichols (2002) and used by Kothari et al. (2005) based on the unexplained accruals or residuals of the model, to
estimate earnings quality of quoted consumer firms in Nigeria. The residual value, estimates the magnitude of the
deviation from the expected level of investment. The deviation is captured by the positive or negative residuals from
the expected accrual model and is denoted as the level of high and/or low earnings quality. The model adopted is
mathematically presented as follows:
0 1 2 3 4 5
1 1
it it it it it it
TCA CFOit CFOit CFOit REV PPE
TotalAsset TotalAsset TotalAsset TotalAsset TotalAsset TotalAsset
     
  
     
+ εit
Where TCAit is total current accruals. Total current accruals comprise of annual change in current assets minus
annual change in current liabilities minus annual change in cash plus annual change in debt in current liabilities plus
annual change in taxes payable. Total Assetsit is lagged total assets, CFOit is cash flow from operations. Cash flow
from operations comprise of the net income before extraordinary items minus total accruals, ∇REVit is annual
change in revenues, scaled by lagged total assets, assets, PPEit is property, plant, and equipment, εit is the error term.
In general, large (small) value of residual value corresponds to lower (higher) accrual and lower (higher) earnings
quality.
3.1.2. The Main Model
The research hypothesis that is presented above is examined using the following regression equation:
VOST = β0 + β1 FRQit + β2 Firm Ageit + + β3EPS + β4Growth rate of the firmit + εit
Where
VOST is volume of share traded i.e yearly volume of share investment of the selected manufacturing firm from the
sampled population. FRQ is the financial reporting quality to be determined using the three accrual models. Firm
Age is the number of years from the date of incorporation to the end of year covered by the study (i.e. 2014). Size of
the firm is the Natural log of total assets and Earnings per share are the earnings for the year divided by the number
of ordinary shares over the period of study.
4. Analyses, Results and Discussion
In this section, we present the descriptive and empirical analyses.
4.1. Descriptive Statistic
Table 1 presents the description statistics of the data. It presents the mean, median, maximum, minimum,
Standard deviation, Sum and sum square dev. from all econometric variables used in the model.
Table-1. Descriptive Statistics
This table summarizes the descriptive statistics from all variables collected from the annual report of the firms. All
variables have been transformed from their natural form. Cash flow followed by (-1) are lagged at period t-1, t+1 for
the Period 2010-2014.
Variables Mean Median Maximum Minimum Std. Dev.
VST 17.06 17.76 19.10 14.50 1.40
VOST 13.47 13.37 16.16 12.06 1.04
TCA 14.90 14.73 16.81 12.98 1.08
SIZE 17.88 17.92 19.51 16.51 0.80
PPE 17.23 17.14 19.18 15.74 1.00
FRQ1 0.00 -0.01 0.05 -0.08 0.03
FGR 14.17 12.31 57.31 4.38 11.35
FRQ 0.00 0.01 0.08 -0.05 0.03
EPS 769.74 305.00 2808.00 35.15 911.72
∇REV 15.90 15.41 18.59 14.11 1.17
CFO2 16.34 16.31 18.30 14.24 1.16
CFO1 16.23 16.49 18.15 14.87 0.92
CFO 15.97 15.91 17.90 13.58 1.30
AGE 47.74 51.00 90.00 11.00 23.40

144
Table 1 presents the descriptive statistics for the main variables.
The table reports that Volume of share traded and value of share traded of the sampled firms have mean
(median) of 17.06 (17.76) and 13.47 (13.37). Size of the firms ranges from 16.51 to 9.51 with a mean (median) of
17.88 (17.91). Financial Reporting Quality has a mean (median) of 0.00 (0.01), Also the absolute value of the
residual ranges from (-0.05) to 0.08 indicating a lower earnings smoothing and higher reporting quality. EPS has
mean (median) of 769.74 (305). The change in revenue has a mean (median) value of 15.90 (15.41). Previous,
current and future cash flow have mean (median) value of 16.23(16.49), 15.97 (15.91), and 16.34 (16.31)
respectively. Age of the firm reports a mean (median) of 47.74 (51.91).
4.2. Correlation Result
The table below shows the relationship among the econometric variables using their correlation matrix.
Table-2.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1. AGE 1
2. CFO 0.193758 1
3. CFO1 0.237119 0.56583 1
4. CFO2 0.217399 0.653554 0.644658 1
5. EPS 0.178484 0.244887 0.2172 0.242896 1
6. FRQ 0.022904 -0.15699 -0.25647 -0.26537 -0.06125 1
7. FGR -0.18793 0.005714 -0.02678 0.192053 0.121277 0.04426 1
8. VOST -0.48832 -0.10093 -0.29289 -0.11287 -0.56429 0.042166 0.118216 1
9. SIZE 0.188411 0.727697 0.699253 0.679366 0.257124 -0.09552 0.119489 -0.1277 1
Source: Data Analysis
Table 2 above shows the relationship between financial reporting quality and investor decision alongside other
controlling variables. It is revealed that there exists a positive correlation between FRQ and volume of share traded
within the period of our study. Volume of shares traded also correlates positively with firm size, cash flows and
growth rate of the firm while the other variables were negatively correlated. It is to be noted here that the correlation
matrix in table 2 is a mere descriptive analysis of the relationship among the variables; it does not tell the nature and
the direction of such relationship. Therefore, before a meaningful inference could be drawn from the result in table 2,
there is the need to discuss the results of the P-VAR model.
The multivariate form of VAR estimate is presented in table 3 below
4.3. P-Vector Auto Regression Estimates
Table-3. P-Vector Auto regression Estimates
The result in table 3 shows that there is a dynamic relationship among the variables, although, individual
coefficients have no strong economic meanings. A comparison between R2
and Adj. R2
really shows the nature of
the relation. The positive impact of financial reporting quality is well pronounced in the table. It shows that there is a
casual relationship between FRQ and Volume of shares traded.
4.3.1. Diagnostic Tests
Diagnostic tests were carried out on the model to validate the correctness of our model specification. The
Hausman test was first estimated to determine whether fixed or random effect is suitable for the model. The
probability of this test showed 0.9973 which is higher than the acceptable 5%; thus, the null hypothesis of estimate
LOGVOST EPS GROWTHRA
TE
FRQ SIZE
LOGVOST(-1) 0.527612 14.79054 5.099175 0.001751 0.023920
LOGVOST(-2) 0.031645 -23.18078 -6.631006 -0.006104 -0.071886
EPS(-1) -0.000833 1.179135 0.000720 1.49E-05 -0.000308
EPS(-2) 0.000668 -0.162397 -0.003323 -1.77E-05 0.000261
GROWTHRATE(-1) 0.009322 4.421981 0.676353 0.000753 0.003866
GROWTHRATE(-2) -0.041765 1.618482 0.241919 -0.001422 0.011566
FRQ(-1) 6.458842 1175.777 151.2053 -0.058051 -0.229553
FRQ(-2) 5.862708 -1049.942 -78.50065 0.121342 0.771562
SIZE(-1) 0.684511 -175.9552 -12.94724 0.011270 0.710060
SIZE(-2) -0.772913 166.2512 12.08398 -0.013403 0.285461
C 7.990718 247.9883 36.08817 0.103608 0.775347
R-squared 0.611876 0.977510 0.511524 0.282362 0.974399
Adj. R-squared 0.407601 0.965674 0.254432 -0.095343 0.960924
F-statistic 2.995345 82.58332 1.989651 0.747573 72.31493

145
random effect was accepted. However, running the Breusch and Pagan Lagrangian Multiplier test for random effects
gave a p-value of 0.1524, indicating that the random effect GLS regression is not the best model to be used. Thus,
pooled OLS was estimated for this model. But the Breusch-Pagan heteroskedasticity test showed a p-value of 0.000,
implying that the null hypothesis of constant variance may not be accepted. Therefore, the model was run using the
robust option on Stata.
Table 4 presents the result of OLS regressions examining whether Financial Reporting Quality explains the
variation in the investors decision making.
4.4. Regression Result
Table-4. Regression Result
VOST = 3602097 + 184.1794FRQ + 0.3963AGE + 15864.15Growthrat – 627.8931 EPS
SE (795123) (8498555) (12132.43) (15864.15) (19507607)
PV (0.000)*** (0.829) (0.002)*** (0.601) (0.002)***
R2
= 0.2752, Ramsey RESET test = 1.57 (0.2105) F-Stat = 5.92 (0.0006) ***
Serial Correlation = 1.046 (0.3642)
* Coefficient is significant at the 10%
** Coefficient is significant at the 5%
*** Coefficient is significant at the 1%
From the result, the Multiple regression estimate showed that financial reporting quality, age and growth rate
have positive effect on investors’ decision measured by volume of shares traded (VOST); while EPS has negative
effect on investors’ decision. This is indicated by their coefficients that are 184. 1794, 0.3963, 15864.15 and -
627.8931 respectively.
6. Interpretation of Result and Discussions
Taking a closer look at the result above, it shows that quality in the financial reports will bring a positive
reaction in the market. Precisely, the size of the independent coefficient, that is, financial reporting quality explains
further that one unit increase in the quality of the financials reported will bring about 184.1794 units increase in
volume of shares of corporate firms traded in Nigeria. The coefficient is not significant as indicated earlier. The
implication of this is that the higher the quality of earnings, the more information asymmetry is reduced, and the
higher the investors’ decision to invest in the market. The above finding is consistent with Brown and Hillegeist
(2007); Jaballah et al. (2014); where they posit that disclosure increases the trading of both uninformed and
informed investors. Also, Brown and Hillegeist (2007) found a strong positive correlation between the quality of
financial reporting and market reaction.
The estimated coefficient of age was found to be 0.3963. Thus, direct relationship with volume of shares traded
was established. This is consistent with the a priori expectation. The variable is significant at 0.002. The implication
is that a unit increase in the age of a company will result to 0.39633 units increase in volume of shares traded. Hence
the findings is in line with Chan-Jane et al. (2015) where they posit that age gives an evidence of the stability of an
establishment upon which investors may leverage in taking risk in such firms.
Also growth rate proxied by change in revenue over time stood at 15864.15. This implies that a unit increase in
growth rate will bring about 15864.15 unit increases in volume of shares traded. This finding is in line with the work
of Beyer (2008) that suggested that an investor wishes to transact with growing firms with growing turnover. Then
we can state that disclosures in growing firms have a higher impact on the market than those of mature firms (Chan-
Jane et al., 2015). Results indicate that there is a negative relationship between EPS and Volume of shares traded.
This implies that a unit increase in EPS will bring about 627.8931 decreases in volume of shares traded. This result
is not consistent with our a priori expectation.
The overall goodness of the model as shown by the coefficient of determination is 27%. This implies that 27%
variation experienced in the volume of shares traded for the period being investigated can be attributed to Financial
Reporting Quality and the control variables while the remaining 73% variations in volume of share traded are caused
by other factors not included in the model specification. To an extent, this connotes a weak explanatory power of the
variables. The F-statistic which measures the joint statistical influence of the explanatory variables on the dependent
variable was found to be statistically significant at 5% percent level. The F-stat figure of 5.92 (0.0006) implies that
the explanatory variables jointly are important determinants of Nigerian investors’ economic decision. Thus, the null
hypothesis that Financial Reporting Quality has no significant effect on Investors’ decision may not be accepted.
7. Conclusion and Recommendations
In this paper we analyzed the effect of FRQ on Investors decisions using a representative sample of Nigerian
Manufacturing firms for the period of 2010-2014. The result indicates that higher reporting quality increases
investment decision. The overall conclusion of the study therefore is that financial reporting quality enhances
investment decision in Nigeria. In addition firm Size, firm’s growth rate and firm age exert positive impact on
investment decisions. The study therefore recommends that, corporate firms should voluntarily produce quality
report as this is shown to create positive market reaction. Growing economies can leverage on this and boost their

146
performance and this can be done by proper and intentional disclosures of both mandatory and voluntary
information.
References
Ajinkya, B. B., Bhojra, S. and Sengupta, P. (2005). The association between outside directors, institutional investors
and the properties of management earnings forecasts. Journal of Accounting and Research, 43(3): 343-76.
Barth, M. E., Beaver, W. H. and Landsman, W. R. (2001). The relevance of the value relevance literature for
financial accounting standard setting: Another view. Journal of Accounting And Economics, 31(1): 77-104.
Beest, F., Braam, G. and Boelens, S. (2009). Quality of Financial Reporting: measuring qualitative characteristics.
Nijmegen Center for Economics (NiCE), Institute for Management Research, Radboud University
Nijmegen. P.O. Box 9108, 6500 HK Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Available:
http://www.ru.nl/nice/workingpapers
Beretta, S. and Bozzolan, S. (2004). A framework for the analysis of firm risk communication. The International
Journal of Accounting, 39(3): 265-88.
Beyer, A. (2008). Financial analysts’ forecast revisions and managers’ reporting behavior. Journal of accounting and
economics, 46(3): 334-48.
Biddle and Hilary (2006). Accounting quality and firm-level capital investment. The Accounting Review, 81(2006):
963–82.
Biddle, Hilary, Rodrigo, S. and Verdi, C. (2009). How does financial reporting quality relate to Investment
efficiency? Journal of Accounting and Economics, 48(2009): 112-31.
Bolo, G. and Hassani, S. A. (2007). Earnings management and its measurement: A theoretical approach. Iranian
Association of Certified Public Accountants, 4(12): 72-88.
Brown, S. and Hillegeist, S. A. (2007). How disclosure quality affects the level of information asymmetry. Review of
Accounting Studies, 12(2-3): 443-77.
Bushman, R. M. and Smith, A. J. (2001). Financial accounting information and corporate governance. Journal of
Accounting and Economics, 32(1): 237–333.
Chan-Jane, L., Tawei, W. and Chae-Jung, P. (2015). Financial reporting quality and investment decisions for family
firms. Asia Pacific Journal of Management: 1-34.
Chang, M., Gino, A., Watson, I. and Wee, M. (2008). Does Disclosure Quality via Investor relations affect
information asymmetry? Australian Journal. Manage, 33:
Choi, B., Collins, D. W. and Johnson, W. B. (1997). Valuation implications of reliability differences: The case of
nonpension postretirement obligations. The Accounting Review, 72(3): 351-83.
Cohen, J., Krishnamorthy, G. and Wright, A. (2004). The corporate governance mosaic and financial reporting
quality. Journal of Accounting Literature, 23: 87-152. Availabe:
https://www2.bc.edu/~cohen/Research/Research4.pdf
Core, J. E. (2001). A review of the empirical disclosure literature: discussion. Journal of Accounting and Economics,
31(1): 441-56.
Daniel, N. D., Denis, D. J. and L., N. (2010). Sources of financial flexibility: Evidence from cash flow shortfalls.
Working paper. Purdue University.
Dechow, P. and Dichev, I. (2002). The quality of accruals and earnings: the role of accrual estimation errors. The
Accounting Review, 77(S-1): 35–59.
Healy, P. and Wahlen, J. (1999). A review of the earnings management literature and its implications for standard
setting. Accounting Horizons, 13(4): 365-83.
Healy, P. M. and Palepu, K. G. (2001). Information asymmetry, corporate disclosure, and the capital markets: a
review of the empirical disclosure literature. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31(1): 405-40.
Hirst, D., Hopkins, P. and Wahlen, J. (2004). Fair values, income measurement, and bank analysts’ risk and
valuation judgments. The Accounting Review, 79(2): 453-72.
IASB (2008). Objective and qualitative characteristics of accounting information. Available:
http://www.ifrs.org/current-projects/iasb-projects/conceptual-framework
Jaballah, E., Yousfi, W. and A., Z. M. (2014). Quality of financial reports: Evidence from the tunisian firms. E3
Journal of Business Management and Economics, 5(2): 030-38.
Johansson, H. and Wilandh, N. (2005). Trading volume: The behavior in information asymmetries. 2734.
http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A3940&dswid=
Jonas, G. and Blanchet, J. (2000). Assessing quality of financial reporting. Accounting Horizons, 14(3): 353-63.
Jones, J. (1991). Earnings management during import relief investigations. Journal of Accounting Review, 29(1):
193–228.
Kariuki, G. and Jagongo, A. (2013). Institutional investors’ perceptions on quality of financial reporting in kenya.
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 3(21): 144-54.
Khaoula, F., Amor and Ayed, A. (2013). Tax planning and firm value: Evidence from european companies.
International Journal of Economics and Strategic Management Business, 4: 73-78.
Kothari, S. P., Leone, A. J. and Wasley, C. E. (2005). Performance matched discretionary accrual measures. Journal
of Accounting and Economics, 39(1): 163–97.

147
McNichols, M. (2002). Discussion of the quality of accruals and earnings multiples. Journal of Accounting
Research, 40(1): 135-72.
McNichols, M. and Stubben, S. (2008). Does earnings management affect firms’ investment decisions. The
Accounting Review, 86: 1571–603.
Mehdi, A., Saeed, F., Sharife, M. I. and Fateme, Z. (2012). Trading volume, company age, company size and their
effect on deviation of earning prediction. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business, 2(3): 16-22.
Nichols, D. and Wahlen, J. (2004). How Do earnings numbers relate to stock returns? A review of classic accounting
research with updated evidence. Accounting Horizons, 18(4): 263-86.
Nwaobia, A. N., Kwarbai, J. D. and Ogundajo, G. O. (2016). Tax planning and firm value: Empirical evidence from
Nigerian consumer goods industrial sector. Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 7(12): 172–83.
Nyor, T. (2013). Financial reporting quality of nigeria firms: Users’ perception. International Journal of Business
and Social Science, 4(13): 273-79.
Rego, S. O. (2003). Tax avoidance activities of US multinational corporations. Contemporary Accounting Research,
20(4): 805– 33.
Santhosh, R., Chuan-San, W. and Yong, Y. (2013). The role of financial reporting quality in mitigating the
constraining effect of dividend policy on investment decision. Accounting review, 88(3): 1007-39.
Schipper, K. and Vincent, L. (2003). Earnings quality. Accounting Horizons 17 (supplement). 235–50.
Seyed, M. M. (2014). The relationship between financial reporting quality and investment efficiency in tehran stock
exchange. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 4(6): 104-13.
Sheikh, J., Kahn, M. M., Iqbal, W. and Ahmed, W. S. (2012). Examination of theoretical and empirical studies on
firm’s performance in relation to its board size: A study of small and medium size public firms. Journal of
Management Research, 4(2): 242-54.
Stergios, T. and Michalis, B. (2012). Auditor’s perceptions of financial reporting quality: The case of greece.
International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting, 2(1): 57-74.
Tetlock, P. C. (2011). Do investors react to stale information? Review of Financial Studies, 24(3): 1481-512.
Van der Meulen, S., Gaeremynck, A. and Willekens, M. (2007). Attribute differences between US GAAP and IFRS
earnings: An exploratory study. The International Journal of Accounting, 42(2): 123-42.

Financial Reporting Quality on Investors? Decisions

More Related Content

What's hot (19)

Similar to Financial Reporting Quality on Investors? Decisions (20)

More from International Journal of Economics and Financial Research (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Financial Reporting Quality on Investors? Decisions