2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.intacc.2016.10.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Management Forecasts, Idiosyncratic Risk, and the Information Environment

Abstract: Management forecasts are an important source of information for the Japanese stock market. In this paper, we use management forecast error as a proxy for disclosure quality to investigate the relationship between disclosure quality and idiosyncratic risk.We find that management forecast error is positively related to idiosyncratic risk, suggesting that high-quality public information reduces idiosyncratic risk. Furthermore, we present evidence that management forecast error is less positively related to idiosy… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The idiosyncratic risk of return is the same as abnormal returns. That is the difference between the realized return and the expected one.8 The RMSE (Root-Mean-Square Error) can be used as the standard deviation of residuals or as a measure of uncertainty(Kitagawa & Okuda, 2013).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The idiosyncratic risk of return is the same as abnormal returns. That is the difference between the realized return and the expected one.8 The RMSE (Root-Mean-Square Error) can be used as the standard deviation of residuals or as a measure of uncertainty(Kitagawa & Okuda, 2013).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The general idea lying behind this study is that «information from the social environment regard-ing the MAI, following forecasts errors and the risk of idiosyncratic situations can represent important sources of knowledge» (Kitagawa and Okuda, 2016, p. 487). Consequently, the value of idiosyncratic and non-idiosyncratic (potentially synergic) MAI trends have been taken into account here as well as in other studies focusing on consequences of forecasting errors (Ota, 2010;Kitagawa & Okuda, 2016). RBT studies on organizations' commitment (Helfat and Lieberman, 2002), timing (Zott, 2003), and managerial capabilities focused on different sources of knowledge creation (Teece, Pisano and Shuen, 1997).…”
Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The above mentioned discussion of the literatures follows two approaches. The first approach estimates bank risk that was linked with market risks, association between uncertainty and financial intermediaries, the effects of these shocks to the economy of the country, and also time-dynamic uncertainty globalization in the financial institutions (Holod et al, 2017;Valencia, 2017;Asongu et al, 2017;Kitagawa & Okuda, 2016;Bekaert et al, 2013). Whereas, the second approach estimates the relationship between financial development, economic growth, and energy consumption by using the conventional unit root test, cointegration and causality tests (Rizwan-ul Hassan et al, 2017;Javid & Sharif, 2016;Komal & Abbas, 2015;Kakar et al, 2011;Abbasi & Riaz, 2016;Gokmenoglu et al, 2015;Shahbaz et al, 2008;Shahbaz & Rahman, 2012).…”
Section: South Asian Journal Of Management Sciencesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The findings of this research study showed that shocks in the financial institutions have a significant and adverse impact on the different outcomes of the economy and also that these shocks are key sources of the fluctuations in the business cycles since after the year 1980. Kitagawa and Okuda (2016) examined the forecasting in the management, idiosyncratic risk as well as environment of the information due to the fact that management forecast are considered to be a key source of the information in the stock market of Japan. The authors in this research study had utilized an error of management forecast as a proxy variable for the quality of disclosure as well as idiosyncratic risk.…”
Section: Introduction and Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%