X hits on this document

53 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

12 / 16

0,400

Timeliness Small

0,350

Timeliness Large

0,300

0,250

0,200

0,150

0,100

0,050

0,000

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994 1995 Year

1996

1997

1998

1999

The same applies for conservatism, despite confirmation of the general trends (Figure 4): there is no significant change in 3 during the 1990s for either small or large firms; small companies show a higher average conservatism 3 (0.566 versus 0.236) with 10 per cent statistic significance (sig ¼ 0.073).

One positive point is that the application of Basu’s model significantly improves the R2 for both groups (small and large firms).

1,600

1,400

Conservatism Small Conservatism Large

1,200

1,000

0,800

B3

0,600

0,400

0,200

0,000

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

  • -

    0,200

Year

Timeliness and conservatism

103

Figure 3. Timeliness/size

Figure 4. Conservatism/size

Document info
Document views53
Page views53
Page last viewedThu Jan 19 17:35:10 UTC 2017
Pages16
Paragraphs666
Words7163

Comments