Francisco Bravo Urquiza

Disclosure indices design: does it make a difference?

Measurement of information disclosed by companies is a complex task. Accounting research usually relies on disclosure indices to obtain a proxy for the information disclosed by companies. However, there is no consensus about the best design for these indices. The purpose of this paper is to investigate if there are significant differences among the indices that are used in disclosure studies. Three indices that measure disclosure of forward-looking information are compared: A “quality index” of a multidimensional nature; a “scope index” designed specifically to measure the scope of information, and a “quantity index” that measures information disclosed exclusively in terms of quantity. Results of the empirical analysis indicate that although the indices are correlated, they have a big impact in the rankings of companies. Evidence against the idea of the irrelevance of the particular index chosen is provided.

Disclosure theories and disclosure measures

ABSTRACT Theories have been developed in the disclosure literature to explain the reasons behind the decision to disclose more information. Empirical evidence does not consistently support disclosure theories and results found are contradictory. The difficulty in measuring voluntary disclosure might be one of the reasons influencing on these divergences. In this paper, we investigate two key questions related to disclosure measurement. First, we aim to empirically test if use of disclosure indices that measure different information attributes determines validity of disclosure theories. Second, we investigate how disclosure indices design influences results. Results show that determinants of more specific information attributes are different than those that influence less specific attributes. Furthermore, independently of the information attribute that is measured, disclosure measure design influences results.