摘要
决策有用观作为现行企业财务报告的目标，是指“财务报告应该提供对现在的和可能的投资者、债权人和其他使用者做出合理的投资、信贷和类似决策有用的信息”，虽然财务会计信息的使用者众多，但投资者无疑是最主要的使用者。本文的决策有用性仅指财务会计信息对于证券市场股东的决策有用性，明确界定财务会计信息使用者的范围是为了更好地认识本文的研究主题。中国证券市场是一个新兴市场，同时它又根植于中国转型经济中，新兴加转轨的双重性质导致中国证券市场的经济制度变迁具有频繁性和振荡性的重要特征，会计制度作为经济制度的重要组成部分，经历了数次重大的变迁过程，如何评价和认识会计制度变迁对中国证券市场产生的经济后果历来为理论界、实务界以及监管机构所重视，深入地研究会计制度变迁的经济后果，对于评价证券市场的管制政策以及检验相关的制度变迁理论具有重要的理论意义和实践意义。
新制度经济学一直强调制度对契约结构的决定性影响，并重视制度环境对制度运行效率产生的影响。中国转型经济与新兴资本市场中的制度变迁背景为检验这一命题提供了难得的研究机会，将“法与金融”学派的国别制度因素差异研究框架，运用至一国内地区间的制度环境差异对制度运行效率的影响，能够基本上克服国别资本市场运作机制以及证券市场有效性等因素不具有可比性的局限性，并且也能在一定程度上控制非正式制度安排对制度运行效率的影响，因此，本文主要关注一国内地区间的制度环境差异对会计制度运行效率的影响。
本文在借鉴国内外文献的基础上，结合我国上市公司实际，从地区制度环境、制度变迁与会计信息决策有用性关系的研究视角出发，详细分析和检验会计信息决策有用性是否受到制度环境和制度变迁的双重影响，在此基础上，分别运用价值相关性与盈余信息含量的经验研究方法衡量会计信息决策有用性，深入探讨会计制度变迁的经济后果，并运用行为心理学、经济学、财务学的相关理论，系统地对制度环境、制度变迁如何影响会计信息决策有用性这一经验命题进行研究。对该命题的探究，不仅为会计制度变迁是否提高了会计信息决策有用性提供新的科学证据和理论支持，而且对于理解和重视中国地区间制度环境对会计制度变迁的影响，以及评价会计规则改革、股权分置改革等制度变迁的经济后果，都具有重要的理论和实践价值。
本文共分为八章，各章的主要内容如下：
第一章为导论，主要对论文进行一个简要介绍，具体包括研究背景与问题提出、研究思路、研究主要内容以及研究改进与主要创新之处。
第二章为文献评述，主要包括对会计信息决策有用性经验研究、制度环境与财务会计信息关系经验研究的国内外相关文献进行回顾和评述。
第三章对我国会计改革制度背景进行了较系统地分析，以制度变迁为主线将我国证券市场成立至今的会计改革划分为三个主要时期。
第四章研究制度环境、强制性会计制度变迁与会计信息决策有用性的关系。该章研究会计制度主导时期的会计改革，从决策有用性经验模型出发，全面地考察了制度环境对会计制度变迁效果的影响。
第五章研究地区制度环境诱致性变迁对会计信息决策有用性的影响。该章通过选择会计制度稳定期间的样本公司，以控制会计制度变迁的影响，运用决策有用性经验模型考察了地区制度环境改善对会计信息决策有用性的影响。
第六章研究制度环境、股权分置改革与决策有用性的关系。该章通过决策有用性经验模型分别检验了股改进程、股改对价对决策有用性的影响，在此基础上进一步检验制度环境将如何作用于这一影响。
第七章是制度环境、双重强制性制度变迁与决策有用性。该章以完成股权分置改革的上市公司为研究对象，从决策有用性经验模型出发，分别研究地区制度环境、股改对价、两者的耦合效应与会计准则变迁效果之间的关系。
第八章为全文总结，包括研究结论与启示、研究局限性以及未来可能的研究方向。
本文主要的研究结论如下：
1．强制性会计制度变迁如《股份有限公司会计制度》、《企业会计制度》均影响了会计信息的决策有用性，但影响方向并不一致，地区制度环境在一定程度上加剧了强制性会计制度变迁的效果，投资者保护的“后果假说”与“替代假说”均得到不同程度的支持。
2．地区制度环境的诱致性变迁对会计信息的决策有用性产生了不同程度的影响，随着地区制度环境的改善，会计信息决策有用性具有递增趋势，这在一定程度上说明，研究我国证券市场会计与财务问题不能够忽视地区制度环境诱致性变迁的潜在影响。
3．股权分置改革的股改进程与股改对价均在一定程度上影响会计信息的决策有用性，地区制度环境则在一定程度上加剧了股权分置改革对决策有用性的影响程度，会计规则的内外部执行机制共同对决策有用性发挥作用。
4．2007年新会计准则变迁效果受到制度环境、股改对价水平的独立或者耦合影响，具体表现为制度环境、股改对价影响会计制度变迁后的会计信息决策有用性，“公司治理溢价”理论、投资者保护“后果假说”与“替代假说”均得到不同程度的支持。
本研究具有一定的探索性，研究的主要改进和创新体现在如下四大方面：
第一，在研究内容上，本文从我国地区制度环境存在明显差异的实际出发，率先通过运用市场化指数这一制度变量分析工具来评价会计制度变迁的经济后果，从而为会计制度变迁是否提高了会计信息决策有用性这一命题提供新的科学证据和理论支持。
第二，在研究框架中，本文引入新制度经济学中诱致性制度变迁的研究思路，在对制度环境变量进行深入分析后，率先运用诱致性制度变迁理论检验了中国地区制度环境的诱致性变迁对会计信息决策有用性的影响，从而为深入理解为什么要加速改善地区制度环境提供了重要的理论依据。
第三，立足于我国股权分置改革这一强制性制度变迁背景，本文率先将地区制度环境与股权分置改革相结合，检验两者共同作用于会计信息决策有用性的经济后果，为研究会计规则内外部执行机制共同对会计信息质量的影响，提供了可供借鉴的分析思路和检验方法。
第四，立足于我国新会计准则变迁这一热点问题，本文首次将地区制度环境、股权分置改革与会计制度变迁相结合，检验三者对会计信息决策有用性的影响，丰富了股权分置改革的会计信息经济后果研究。
As the objective of current financial reporting, decision usefulness perspective refers to "financial reporting should provide information that is useful to present and potential investors and creditors and other users in making rational investment, credit, and similar decisions", although there are many users about the financial accounting information, investors no doubt are the most important ones. Decision usefulness in this dissertation refers only to the decision usefulness of financial accounting information for shareholders, and clearly defining the scope of users will be helpful for better understanding the research topic of this dissertation. Securities market of China is an emerging market, and at the same time it is rooted in the Chinese economic transformation, and the dual nature of emerging and transformation leads to frequent institutional changes and oscillations. The accounting system as an important component of economic institutions has experienced several major changes, and how to understand the economic consequences of the changes in the accounting system has always been emphasized and paid attention to by the theoretical, practical researchers, and the regulators. An in-depth study on the economic consequences of the institutional changes of accounting has an important theoretical and practical significance to evaluate the securities market regulatory policies and test the theories related to economic institutional changes.
The new institutional economics always emphasizes the decisive influence of institutions on the contract structures, and attaches importance to the impacts of institutional environment on the institutions' operating efficiency. The background of the institutional changes in the China's economic transformation and emerging capital market has provided a rare research opportunity on testing the proposition about the impacts of institutional environment on the institutions' operating efficiency. Based on the research framework of country-specific differences about the school of "Law and Finance", the research of domestic inter-regional differences in the institutional environment can overcome the limitations that country-specific capital markets' operating mechanism and the effectiveness can not be comparable, and can also control the influence of the informal institutional arrangements on the operating efficiency of the institutions. Therefore, a major concern of this dissertation is that how the domestic inter-regional differences in the institutional environment influence the operating efficiency of the accounting system.
Drawing on the basis of the literatures at home and abroad and considering the practice of Chinese Listed Companies, this dissertation analyses and examines whether the decision usefulness of accounting information has been dually influenced by institutional environment and institutional change, and then uses the empirical research methods of value relevance and earnings informativeness to measure the decision usefulness of accounting information. This dissertation deeply explores the economic consequences of the accounting system's change, and uses the theories of behavioral psychology, economics, finance to explain and analyse the empirical results that how the institutional environment and institutional change affect the decision usefulness of accounting information. The exploration of this proposition not only provides new scientific evidence and theoretical support about whether accounting system change has enhanced the decision usefulness of accounting information, but also has great theoretical and practical value for understanding and attaching importance to the impact of domestic inter-regional differences in the institutional environment on changes in accounting system, as well as for evaluating the economic consequences of institutional change, such as the accounting rules reform and the split share structure reform.
This dissertation is divided into eight chapters, and the contents of each chapter are as follows:
Chapter 1 is the introduction, which briefly introduces the research background and issues, research ideas and contents, research improvements and innovations.
Chapter2 is the literature review. In this chapter, the author reviews and comments the empirical research on the decision usefulness of accounting information, the relationship between institutional environment and financial accounting information.
Chapter3 analyses the institutional background of the accounting reform and divides the accounting reform into three main periods since China's securities market establishment based on the main line of the institutional change.
Chapter4 examines the relations among the institutional environment, mandatory institutional changes in accounting and the decision usefulness of accounting information. Based on accounting reforms in the dominant periods of accounting regulations and the empirical models of decision usefulness, this chapter explores the influence of the institutional environment on the changes of accounting regulations.
Chapter5 examines the relations between the induced institutional change of domestic inter-regional institutional environment and the decision usefulness of accounting information. Using the sample companies during the period of stable accounting system to control the impact of changes in accounting system, this chapter investigates how the improvement of institutional environment affects the decision usefulness of accounting information.
Chapter6 studies how the institutional environment and the split share structure reform affect the decision usefulness of accounting information. This chapter through the empirical models of the decision usefulness tests the process and the consideration of the split share structure reform how to affect the decision usefulness, and then further tests the role of the institutional environment in these two studies.
Chapter7 examines the relations among the institutional environment, dual mandatory institutional changes and decision usefulness. Based on the listed companies that have completed the split share structure reform, this chapter investigates how the institutional environment, the consideration of the split share structure reform, and the coupling of these two factors affect the institutional change of accounting respectively.
Chapter8 summarizes the research findings of this dissertation, and reports the implications we learn, the caveats about this research, and points out the direction for further research.
In this dissertation, the main conclusions are as follows:
1. The mandatory institutional changes in accounting such as the "Accounting Regulations for Listed Companies", "Accounting Regulations for Business Enterprises" have affected the decision usefulness of accounting information, but the directions of the impacts are not consistent. Regional institutional environment has exacerbated the effects of mandatory institutional change in accounting, and the "Consequence Hypothesis" and the "Substitute Hypothesis" about investor protection to some extent have been supported.
2. The induced institutional changes of regional institutional environment have affected the decision usefulness of accounting information, in other words, with the improvement of the regional institutional environment, the decision usefulness of accounting information have increased to some extent. The results suggest that when we are engaged in the research of accounting and financial issues about China's securities market, the potential impacts of the induced institutional changes of regional institutional environment cannot be ignored.
3. The process and the consideration of the split share structure reform to some extent have affected the decision usefulness of accounting information, and regional institutional environment has exacerbated these impacts of the split share structure reform. That is to say, internal and external enforcement mechanisms of accounting rules jointly play a role in decision usefulness.
4. The consequences of new accounting standards change in 2007 have been affected by independent or coupled effects of the institutional environment and the consideration of the split share structure reform. The results suggest that the independent or coupled effects have affected the accounting standards change, in the mean time, the "corporate governance premium" theory, the "Consequence Hypothesis" and the "Substitute Hypothesis" about investor protection to some extent have been supported.
This research has certain exploratory property, and major improvements and innovations are in the following aspects:
First, in terms of the research contents, from the actual situation of domestic inter-regional differences in the institutional environment, for the first time, this paper uses the institutional analysis tools such as the marketlization index to evaluate the economic consequences of accounting system changes, and this paper has provided new scientific evidence and theoretical support about how the accounting system change affects the decision usefulness of accounting information.
Second, in terms of the research framework, this paper has introduced the research ideas of induced institutional change in the new institutional economics, after the in-depth analysis of the institutional environment variables, for the first time, based on the theory of induced institutional change, this paper investigates how the induced institutional change of regional institutional environment affects the decision usefulness of accounting information, and then provides an important theoretical basis on why to accelerate the improvement of regional institutional environment.
Third, based on the institutional background of China's split share structure reform, for the first time, this paper combines the institutional environment with the split share structure reform to jointly examine the economic consequences of the accounting information decision usefulness, which provides fresh ideas and methods to investigate how the internal and external enforcement mechanisms of accounting rules jointly play a role in the quality of accounting information.
Fourth, based on the hot issues of China's new accounting standards changes, for the first time, this paper investigates how the regional institutional environment, the split share structure reform and the accounting standards changes have affected the decision usefulness of accounting information, which enriches the economic consequences research of accounting information about the split share structure reform.
引文
①这里的“股东”不仅包括流通股股东，而且包括非流通股股东，在2005年4月29日股权分置改革前，非流通股股东尽管不能在二级市场上直接买卖股票，但可以在一级市场上进行直接转让的经济决策。
②有两种类型的制度变迁：诱致性制度变迁和强制性制度变迁，前者指的是现行制度安排的变更或替代，或者是新制度安排的创造，它由个人或一群人，在响应获利机会时自发倡导、组织和实行；与此相反，强制性制度变迁由政府命令和法律引入和实行(林毅夫，1989)，这被公认为是对新制度经济学的重要贡献。本文所指的“制度变迁”包括：强制性变迁，如会计制度变迁与股权分置改革；诱致性变迁，如地区制度环境改善。
③“制度环境”有广义与狭义之分。广义的制度环境是指一系列用来建立生产、交换与分配基础的基本的政治、社会和法律基础规则(Davis和North，1979)，林毅夫(1989)将之定义为制度结构，包括马克思主义者所说的生产关系和上层建筑两个方面；狭义的制度环境包括市场竞争、信用体系、契约文化、产权保护、政府治理、法治水平等方面，这些方面会影响到签约及履约的交易成本，进而影响到公司治理的效率，因而一直成为新制度经济学关注的重点。更为重要的是，公司所处的制度环境是相对于所有权安排、董事会制度、信息披露制度、经理人市场机制、控制权转移机制、独立审计制度等更为基础性和外生性的层面，制度环境一定程度上影响着公司治理机制的效率。本文所指的“制度环境”包括三个主要方面：地区市场化进程、地方政府治理(政府干预程度)、地区产权保护与法治水平。
④地区发展不平衡的现实国情导致我国的区域发展战略是：继续推进西部大开发，振兴东北地区等老工业基地，促进中部地区崛起，鼓励东部地区率先发展；东部地区发展是支持区域协调发展的重要基础，要在率先发展中带动和帮助中西部地区发展。可参见《科学发展观重要论述摘编》，2009年，第50页。
①也有众多国内外文献，将决策有用性直接分类为信息观与计量观(或计价模型观)，即将计价模型观与计量观基本等同，如Scott(1997)、汤云为和陆建桥(1998)、赵宇龙(1999)、蔡祥等(2003)。从严格意义上说，计价模型观与计量观是有区别的，本文倾向于将决策有用性分为信息观、计价模型观与计量观。
②Berger、Erickson、Leftwich、Skinner和Smith为纪念An Empirical Evaluation ofAccounting Income Numbers(Ball和Brown，1968)发表40周年，进一步评价了该文对于会计研究的革命性意义。可参见Journal of Accounting Research Vol．46 No．5，Editorial Note，2008，p973。
[1]财政部．企业会计准则及股份有限公司会计制度讲解[M]．北京：中国财政经济出版社，1998．
[2]财政部会计司．关于我国上市公司2007年执行新会计准则情况的分析报告[J]．会计研究，2008，(6)：19—30．
[3]蔡宁、魏明海、路晓艳．投资者保护变迁与会计改革的共生互动性[J]．会计研究，2008，(3)：19—26．
[4]蔡祥、李志文、张为国．中国实证会计研究述评[J]．中国会计与财务研究，2003，(2)：155—183．
[5]陈俊、陈汉文．公司治理、会计准则执行与盈余价值相关性[J]．审计研究，2007，(2)：45—52．
[6]陈梅花．股票市场审计意见信息含量研究[J]．中国会计与财务研究，2002，(1)：62 —82．
[7]陈胜蓝、魏明海．投资者保护与财务会计信息质量[J]．会计研究，2006，(10)：28 —35．
[8]陈小悦、陈晓、顾斌．中国股市弱型效率的实证研究[J]．会计研究，1997，(9)：13—17．
[9]陈晓、陈小悦、刘钊．A股盈余报告的有用性研究[J]．经济研究，1999，(6)：21— 28．
[10]陈信元、陈冬华、李增泉．制度环境与公司治理——中国与东亚国家公司治理国际研讨会综述[J]．中国会计评论，2005，(1)：223—234．
[11]陈信元、陈冬华、朱红军．净资产、剩余收益与市场定价：会计信息的价值相关性[J]．金融研究，2002，(4)：59—70．
[12]陈信元、叶鹏飞、薛建峰．我国会计信息环境的初步分析[J]．会计研究，2000，(8)：8—16．
[13]戴德明、毛新述、姚淑瑜．上市公司预测盈余信息披露的有用性研究[J]．中国会计评论，2005，(2)：253—272．
[14]戴维斯、诺斯．1979，制度变迁的理论：概念与原因，转引自《财产权利与制度变迁》，上海：上海三联书店、上海人民出版社，266—294．
[15]邓传洲．公允价值的价值相关性：B股公司的证据[J]．会计研究，2005，(10)：55—62．
[16]邓淑芳．“关联交易和会计盈余的价值相关性”评述[J]．中国会计评论，2005，(1)：207—210．
[17]杜兴强、修宗峰．制度环境、大股东性质与所有权结构[Z]．工作论文，厦门大学管理学院，2008a．
[18]杜兴强、修宗峰．治理环境、终极产权控制方式与股权结构[Z]．工作论文，厦门大学管理学院，2008b．
[19]杜兴强．会计信息的产权问题研究[M]．大连：东北财经大学出版社，2002．
[20]樊纲、王小鲁、张立文、朱恒鹏．中国各地区市场化相对进程报告[J]．经济研究，2003， (3)：9-18．
[21]樊纲、王小鲁、朱恒鹏．中国市场化指数——各地区市场化相对进程2006年报告[M]．北京：经济科学出版社，2007．
[22]樊纲、王小鲁．中国市场化指数——各地区市场化相对进程2004年度报告[M]．北京：经济科学出版社，2004．
[23]樊纲、王小鲁．中国市场化指数——各地区市场化相对进程报告(2000年)[M]．北京：经济科学出版社，2001．
[24]樊纲、王小鲁．中国市场化指数——各地区市场化相对进程报告(2001年)[M]．北京：经济科学出版社，2003．
[25]方军雄．市场化进程与资本配置效率的改善[J]．经济研究，2006，(5)：50—61．
[26]方军雄．所有制、市场化进程与资本配置效率[J]．管理世界，2007，(11)：27—35．
[27]冯淑萍．关于建立国家统一会计核算制度的若干问题[J]．会计研究，2001，(1)：9—13．
[28]冯淑萍．适应市场经济要求制定会计准则完善会计制度，转引自企业会计准则及股份有限公司会计制度讲解[M]．北京：中国财政经济出版社，1998．
[29]付磊．我国会计改革的回顾与思考[J]．会计研究，2007，(12)：23—28．
[30]葛家澍、黄世忠．反映经济真实是会计的基本职能[J]．会计研究，1999，(12)：2—7．
[31]葛家澍．创新与趋同相结合的一项准则[J]．会计研究，2006，(3)：3—6．
[32]葛家澍．基本会计准则与财务会计概念框架[J]．会计研究，1997，(10)：1—4．
[33]葛家澍．市场经济下会计基本理论与方法研究[M]．北京：中国财政经济出版社，1996．
[34]郭道扬．论统一会计制度[J]．会计研究，2005，(1)：11—24．
[35]贺建刚、刘峰．大股东控制、利益输送与投资者保护[J]．中国会计与财务研究，2005，(3)：101—135．
[36]洪剑峭、方军雄．关联交易和会计盈余的价值相关性[J]．中国会计评论，2005，(1)：87—98．
[37]黄世忠、刘维．提高会计信息质量的重大举措——感悟《企业会计制度》[J]．会计研究，2001，(2)：3—8．
[38]黄世忠．上市公司会计信息质量面临的挑战与思考[J]．会计研究，2001，(10)：6—11．
[39]黄志忠、白云霞．会计方法变迁、会计信息质量与股市效应[J]．中国会计评论，2004，(2)：409—424．
[40]江伟、李斌．制度环境、国有产权与银行差别贷款[J]．金融研究，2006，(11)：116—126．
[41]蒋义宏、童驯、杨霞．业绩预警公告的信息含量[J]．中国会计与财务研究，2003，(4)145—163．
[42]蒋义宏．1985—1997中国股市发展对会计思想的影响[J]．会计研究，1998，(6)：1—6．
[43]靳庆鲁、原红旗．公司治理与股权分置改革对价的确定[Z]．工作论文，上海财经大学会计学院，2006．
[44]荆新、廖冠民、毛世平．公司治理、制度环境与民营化效应[J]．经济理论与经济管理，2007，(3)：67—71．
[45]柯武刚、史漫飞，韩朝华译．制度经济学——社会秩序和公共政策[M]．北京：商务印书馆，2002．
[46]雷光勇、刘慧龙．市场化进程、最终控制人性质与现金股利行为[J]．管理世界，2007，(7)：120—128．
[47]李国运．论资本市场与会计的演化关系[J]．会计研究，2007，(5)：46—52．
[48]李连军．会计制度变迁与政府治理结构[J]．会计研究，2007，(6)：33—40．
[49]李晓强．国际会计准则和中国会计准则下的价值相关性比较[J]．会计研究，2004，(7)15—25．
[50]李玉环．改革开放以来我国会计制度改革的回顾与评价[J]．会计研究，2001，(9)：53—57．
[51]李玉环．深化会计制度变迁，打造高质量会计准则制度[J]．会计研究，2003，(7)：3—6．
[52]李增泉、刘凤委、于旭辉．经济制度、控制权私利与股权分置对价[C]．会议论文，首届中国管理学年会，2006．
[53]李增泉、孙铮、王志伟．“掏空”与所有权安排[J]．会计研究，2004，(12)：3—13．
[54]李增泉．实证分析：审计意见的信息含量[J]．会计研究，1999，(8)：16—22．
[55]林毅夫．1989，关于制度变迁的经济学理论：诱致性变迁与强制性变迁，转引自《财产权利与制度变迁》，上海：上海三联书店、上海人民出版社，371—418．
[56]刘爱东．会计准则趋同对我国企业应对反倾销影响的调查分析[J]．会计研究，2008，(9)：33—38．
[57]刘峰、吴风、钟瑞庆．会计准则能提高会计信息质量吗[J]．会计研究，2004，(5)：8—19．
[58]刘峰．会计准则变迁[M]．北京：中国财政经济出版社，2000．
[59]刘峰．会计准则研究[M]．大连：东北财经大学出版社，1996．
[60]刘纪鹏．应利用股市泡沫和通胀做点事[J]．新财经，2008，(9)．
[61]刘玉廷．《企业会计制度》的中国特色及与国际惯例的协调[J]．会计研究，2001，(3)：3—8．
[62]刘玉廷．新修订的《会计法》所实现的若干重要突破[J]．会计研究，2000，(1)：10—19．
[63]刘玉廷．中国企业会计准则体系：架构、趋同与等效[J]．会计研究，2007，(3)：2—8．
[64]柳木华．业绩快报的信息含量：经验证据与政策含义[J]．会计研究，2005，(7)：39—43．
[65]柳木华．盈利之间价值相关性比较研究[J]．中国会计与财务研究，2004，(3)：85—102．
[66]柳木华．盈余质量的市场反应[J]．中国会计评论，2003，(1)：193—213．
[67]楼继伟．中国企业会计准则建设的可贵实践和崭新突破[J].会计研究，2006，(2)：5—6．
[68]陆宇峰．净资产倍率和市盈率的投资决策有用性[D]．上海财经大学博士学位论文，1999．
[69]陆正飞、黄明辉．固定资产投资的信息含量研究[J]．中国会计与财务研究，2002，(2)：43—60．
[70]吕伟．政府分权、市场化进程及国企雇佣行为[J]．改革，2006，(9)：95—100．
[71]罗党论、唐清泉．市场环境与控股股东“掏空”行为研究[J]．会计研究，2007，(4)： 69—74．
[72]罗党论、唐清泉．中国民营上市公司制度环境与绩效问题研究[J]．经济研究，2009，(2)：106—118．
[73]罗婷、薛健、张海燕．解析新会计准则对会计信息价值相关性的影响[J]．中国会计评论，2008，(2)：129—140．
[74]罗正英、吴昊．终极控制、治理环境与盈余管理[J]．上海经济研究，2007，(12)：26—36．
[75]迈克尔·查特菲尔德，文硕、董晓柏译．会计思想史[M]．北京：中国商业出版社，1989．
[76]孟焰、袁淳．亏损上市公司会计盈余价值相关性实证研究[J]．会计研究，2005，(5)：42—46．
[77]潘琰、陈凌云、林丽花．会计准则的信息含量：中国会计准则与IFRS之比较[J]．会计研究，2003，(7)：7—15．
[78]曲晓辉、邱月华．强制性制度变迁与盈余稳健性[J]．会计研究，2007，(7)：20—28．
[79]屈文洲、许年行、关家雄、吴世农．市场化、政府干预与股票流动性溢价的分配[J]．经济研究，2008，(4)：132—146．
[80]劭红霞、方军雄．我国上市公司无形资产价值相关性研究[J]．会计研究，2006，(12)：25—32．
[81]沈艺峰、肖珉、黄娟娟．中小投资者法律保护与公司权益资本成本[J]．经济研究，2005，(6)：115—124．
[82]沈艺峰、许琳、黄娟娟．我国股权分置中对价水平的“群聚”现象分析[J]．经济研究，2006，(11)：102—111．
[83]沈艺峰、许年行、杨熠．我国中小投资者法律保护历史实践的实证检验[J]．经济研究，2004，(9)：90—100．
[84]盛洪．现代制度经济学(上下卷)[M]．北京：北京大学出版社，2007．
[85]世界银行．政府治理、投资环境与和谐社会：中国120个城市竞争力的提高[M]．研究报告，2006．
[86]孙爱军、陈小悦．关于会计盈余的信息含量的研究[J]．北京大学学报(哲学社会科学版)，2002，(1)：15—27．
[87]孙铮、贺建刚．中国会计研究发展：基于改革开放三十年视角[J]．会计研究，2008，(7)：7—15．
[88]孙铮、李增泉．收益指标价值相关性实证研究[J]．中国会计与财务研究，2001，(2)：1—36．
[89]孙铮、刘凤委、李增泉．市场化程度、政府干预与企业债务期限结构——来自我国上市公司的经验证据[J]．经济研究，2005，(5)：52—63．
[90]孙铮、刘浩．中国会计改革新形势下的准则理论实证研究及其展望[J]．会计研究，2006，(9)：15—22．
[91]汤云为、陆建桥．论证券市场中的会计研究：发现与启示[J]．经济研究，1998，(8)：50—59．
[92]王化成、程小可、佟岩．经济增加值的价值相关性——与盈余、现金流量、剩余收益指标的对比[J]．会计研究，2004，(5)：75—81．
[93]王化成、佟岩．控股股东与盈余质量——基于盈余反应系数的考察[J]．会计研究，2006，(2)：66—74．
[94]王军．学习好宣传好贯彻好新会计准则全面提升会计工作在经济社会发展中的服务效 能[J]．会计研究，2006，(8)：3—9．
[95]王跃堂、孙铮、陈世敏．会计改革与会计信息质量[J]．会计研究，2001，(7)：16 —26．
[96]魏明海．会计信息质量经验研究的完善与应用[J]．会计研究，2005，(3)：28—35．
[97]吴超鹏、郑方镳、林周勇、李文强、吴世农．对价支付影响因素的理论和实证分析[J]．经济研究，2006，(8)：14—23．
[98]吴联生．会计信息失真的“三分法”：理论框架与证据[J]．会计研究，2003，(1)：25—30．
[99]吴联生．盈余管理与会计域秩序[J]．会计研究，2005，(5)：37—41．
[100]吴世农、黄志功．上市公司盈利信息报告、股价变动与股市效率的实证研究[J]．会计研究，1997，(4)：12—17．
[101]吴晓求．股权分置改革的若干理论问题[J]．财贸经济，2006，(2)：24—31．
[102]夏立军、陈信元．市场化进程、国企改革策略与公司治理结构的内生决定[J]．经济研究，2007，(7)：82—95．
[103]夏立军、方轶强．政府控制、治理环境与公司价值——来自中国证券市场的经验证据[J]．经济研究，2005，(5)：40—51．
[104]谢德仁．企业剩余索取权：分享安排与剩余计量[M]．上海：上海三联书店、上海人民出版社，2001．
[105]辛宇、徐莉萍．上市公司现金持有水平的影响因素：财务特征、股权结构及治理环境[J]．中国会计评论，2006，(2)：307—320．
[106]辛宇、徐莉萍．投资者保护视角下治理环境与股改对价之间的关系研究[J]．经济研究，2007，(9)：121—133．
[107]许年行、赖建清、吴世农．公司财务与投资者法律保护研究述评[J]．管理科学学报，2008，(2)：101—109．
[108]许年行、吴世农．我国上市公司股权分置改革中的锚定效应研究[J]．经济研究，2007，(1)：114—125．
[109]薛爽．亏损公司的股票价格是如何确定的?[J]．中国会计与财务研究，2002，(4)：100—133．
[110]薛爽．预亏公告的信息效应[J]．中国会计与财务研究，2001，(3)：117—143．
[111]薛云奎、王志台．无形资产信息披露及其价值相关性研究[J]．会计研究，2001，(11)：40—47．
[112]杨华军、胡奕明．制度环境与自由现金流的过度投资[J]．管理世界，2007，(9)：99—116．
[113]杨瑞龙．我国制度变迁方式转换的三阶段论[J]．经济研究，1998，(1)：3—10．
[114]杨善林、杨模荣、姚禄仕．股权分置改革与股票市场价值相关性研究[J]．会计研究，2006，(12)：41—46．
[115]叶会、李善民．治理环境、政府控制和控制权定价[J]．南开管理评论，2008，(5)：79—84．
[116]于鹏．IPO公司预测盈利的价值相关性[J]．会计研究，2007，(6)：76—82．
[117]曾庆生、陈信元．国家控股、超额雇员与劳动力成本[J]．经济研究，2006，(5)：74—86．
[118]曾庆生、姜红玲．市场化进程、地区失业率与上市公司社会性负担[J]．上海管理科学，2006，(6)：19—22．
[119]张然、张会丽．新会计准则中合并报表理论变革的经济后果研究[J]．会计研究，2008， (12)：39—46．
[120]张育军、肖立见、隆武华．转轨时期中国证券市场改革与发展[M]．成都：西南财经大学出版社，2004．．
[121]赵春光．现金流量价值相关性的实证研究[J]．会计研究，2004，(2)：29—35．
[122]赵俊强、廖士光、李湛．中国上市公司股权分置改革中的利益分配研究[J]．经济研究，2006，(11)：112—122．
[123]赵学军．改革开放以来中国商业信用制度的诱致性变迁[J]．中国经济史研究，2005，(2)：58—67．
[124]赵宇龙、王志台．我国证券市场“功能锁定”现象的实证研究[J]．经济研究，1999，(9)：56—63．
[125]赵宇龙．会计盈余披露的信息含量——来自上海股市的经验证据[J]．经济研究，1998，(7)：41—49．
[126]赵宇龙．会计盈余与股价行为——对深沪股市的实证研究[D]．上海财经大学博士学位论文，1999．
[127]郑志刚、孙艳梅、谭松涛、姜德增．股权分置改革对价确定与我国上市公司治理机制有效性的检验[J]．经济研究，2007，(7)：96—109．
[128]郑志刚．法律外制度的公司治理角色——一个文献综述[J]．管理世界，2007b，(9)：136—147．
[129]郑志刚．金融发展的决定因素——一个文献综述[J]．管理世界，2007a，(3)：138—151．
[130]朱松．最终控制人特征与盈余信息含量[J]．中国会计与财务研究，2006，(1)：1—25．
[131]朱武祥．理性的企业行为与低效的公司控制权市场[J]．证券市场导报，2000，(9)：53-55．
[1]Alchian,A.,1965,The Basis of some Recent Advances in the Theory of Management of the Firm,Journal of Industrial Economics 14,30-44.
[2]Alford,A,,Jones,J.,Leftwich,R.,Zmijewski,M.,1993,The relative informativeness of accounting disclosures in different countries,Journal of Accounting Research31,183-223.
[3]Ali,A.,Hwang,L.,2000,Country-specific factors related to financial reporting and the value relevance of accounting data,Journal of Accounting Research38,1-21.
[4]Amir,E.,Harris,T.S.,Venuti,E.K.,1993,A comparison of the value-relevance of U.S.versus Non-U.S.GAAP accounting measures using form 20-F reconciliations,Journal of Accounting Research31,230-264.
[5]Ashbaugh,H.,LaFond,R.,2003,Reporting incentives and the quality of non-U.S,firms' working capital accruals,Working paper,University of Wisconsin.
[6]Ashbaugh,H.,Olsson,P.,2002,An Exploratory Study of the Valuation Properties of Cross-Listed Firms' IAS and U.S.GAAP Earnings and Book Values,The Accounting Review77,107-126.
[7]Ball,R.,Kothari,S.P.,Robin,A.,2000,The effect of international institutional factors on properties of accounting earnings,Journal of Accounting andEconomics29,1-52.
[8]Ball,R.,Robin,A.,Wu,J.S.,2000,Accounting standards,the institutional environment and issuer incentives:Effect on timely loss recognition in China,Asian-Pacific Journal of Accounting and Economics7,71-96.
[9] Ball, R., Robin, A., Wu, J.S., 2003, Incentives versus standards: properties of accounting income in four East Asian countries and implications for acceptance of IAS, Journal of Accounting and Economics36, 235-270.
[10] Ball, R., 1995, Theory of Stock Market Efficiency: Accomplishments and limitations, Journal of Applied Corporate Finance 8, 4-17.
[11] Barth, M., Clinch, G., 1996, International accounting differences and their relation to share prices: evidence from U.K., Australian, and Canadian firms, Contemporary Accounting Research 13, 135-170.
[12] Barth, M., McNichols, M., 1994, Estimation and market valuation of environmental liabilities relating to superfund sites, Journal of Accounting Research 32, 177-209.
[13] Barth, M.E., 1994, Fair value accounting: evidence from investment securities and the market valuation of banks, The Accounting Review69, 1-25.
[14] Barth, M.E., Beaver, W.H., Landsman, W., 2001, The relevance of value relevance research, Journal of Accounting and Economics31, 77-104.
[15] Barth, M.E., Beaver, W.H., Landsman, W.R., 1996, Value-relevance of banks fair value disclosures under SFAS 107, The Accounting Review7I, 513-537.
[16] Barth, M.E., Clinch, G., 1996, International accounting differences and their relation to share prices: Evidence from U.K., Australian, and Canadian firms, Contemporary Accounting Research 13, 13 5-170.
[17] Barth, M.E., Landsman, W.R., Lang, M., 2008, International Accounting Standards and Accounting Quality, Journal of Accounting Research46, 467-498.
[18] Bartov, E., Goldberg, S.R., Kim, M., 2001, The Valuation-relevance of Earnings and Cash Flows: an International Perspective, Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting12, 103-132.
[19] Bernard, V. L. and T. L. Stober, 1989, The Nature and Amount of Information in Cash Flows and Accruals, The Accounting Review64, 624-652.
[20] Bhartacharya, U., Daouk, H., Welker, M., 2003, The world price of earnings opacity, The Accounting Review78, 641-678.
[21] Biddle, G.C., Bowen, R.M., Wallace, J.S., 1997, Does EVA beat earnings? Evidence on associations with stock returns and firm values, Journal of Accounting and Economics24,301-336.
[22] Black, F.X., 1986, Noise, Journal of Finance41, 529-543.
[23] Boonlert-U-Thai, K., Meek, G.K., Nabar, S., 2006a, Earnings attributes and investor protection: International evidence, The International Journal of Accounting41, 327-357.
[24] Boonlert-U-Thai, K., Meek, G.K., Nabar, S., 2006b, Reply to Discussion of "Earnings attributes and investor-protection: International evidence", The International Journal of Accounting41, 369-372.
[25] Bowen, R. M., D. Burgstahler and L. A. Daley, 1987, The Incremental Information Content of Accruals versus Cash Flows, The Accounting Review61, 723-747.
[26] Brown, S., K. Lo and T. Lys, 1999, Use of R2 in Accounting Research: Measuring Changes in Value Relevance over the Last Four Decades, Journal of Accounting and Economics28,83-115.
[27] Burgstahler, D., Hail, L., Leuz, C., 2005, The Importance of Reporting Incentives: Earnings Management in European Private and Public Firms, Working Paper, University of Pennsylvania.
[28] Bushman, R.M., Piotroski, J.D., 2006, Financial reporting incentive for conservative accounting: The influence of legal and political institutions, Journal of Accounting and Economics42, 107-148.
[29] Bushman, R.M., Piotroski, J.D., Smith, A.J., 2004, What determines corporate transparency? Journal of Accounting Research42, 207-252.
[30] Bushman, R.M., Piotroski, J.D., Smith, A.J., 2005, Insider Trading Restrictions and Analysts' Incentives to Follow Firms, Journal of Financel, 35-66.
[31] Bushman, R.M., Smith, A.J., 2001, Financial accounting information and corporate governance, Journal of Accounting and Economics32, 237-333.
[32] Bushman, R.M., Smith, A.J., 2003, Transparency, Financial Accounting Information and Corporate Governance, Economic Policy Review9, 65-87.
[33] Chang, J.J., Khanna, T., Palepu, K.G., 2000, Analyst activity around the world, Working paper, Harvard Business School and the Wharton School.
[34] Chen, C.J.P., Chen, S., Su, X., 2001, Is Accounting Information Value relevant in the Emerging Chinese Stock Market? Journal of international Accounting, Auditing and Taxation10, 1-22.
[35] Chen, J. P., Z. Li, and X. Su, 2005, Rent Seeking Incentives, Political Connections and Organizational Structure: Empirical Evidence from Listed Family Firms in China, Working Paper, City University of Hong Kong, and Shanghai University of Finance and Economics.
[36] Chen, S.M., Wu, D.H., 2007, Accounting Conservatism in Chinese Listed Firms: The Influence of Standards, Incentives, and Monitoring, Working Paper, Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
[37] Chen, S.M., Wu, D.H., 2007, Accounting Conservatism in Chinese Listed Firms: The Influence of Standards, Incentives, and Monitoring, Working Paper, Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
[38] Christie, Andrew A., 1987, On cross-sectional analysis in accounting research, Journal of Accounting and Economics9, 231-258.
[39] Claessens , S. , S. , Djankov , J . P. H. Fan, L. H. P., Lang, 2002, Disentangling The Incentive and Entrenchment Effects of Large Shareholding, The Journal of Finance57,2741-2771.
[40] Clinton, B.D. and Chen, S.,1998, Do new performance measures measure up? Management Accounting, October, 38-43.
[41] Coase, R., 1937, The Nature of the Firm, Economica, Nov, 4.
[42] Collins, D., Maydew, E., Weiss, I., 1997, Changes in the value-relevance of earnings and book values over the past forty years, Journal of Accounting and Economics27, 39-67.
[43] Collins, D., S.P. Kothari, J. Shanken, and R. Sloan, 1994, Lack of timeliness and noise as explanations for the low contemporaneous returns-earnings relation, Journal of Accounting and Economics18, 289-324.
[44] De Long, J.B., Shleifer, A., Summers, L., and Waidmann, R., 1990, Noise Trader Risk in Financial Markets, Journal of Political Economy 98, 703-738.
[45] Dechow, P. M., 1994, Accounting Earnings and Cash Flows as Measures of Firm Performance: the Role of Accounting Accruals, Journal of Accounting and Economics18,3-42.
[46] DeChun Wang, 2006, Founding Family Ownership and Earnings Quality, Journal of Accounting Research44, 619-656.
[47] DeFond, M.L., Hung, M., 2004, Investor protection and corporate governance: Evidence from Worldwide CEO Turnover, Journal of Accounting Research41, 269-312.
[48] DeFond, M.L., M.Hung and R.Trezevant, 2007, Investor protection and the information content of annual earnings announcements: international evidence, Journal of Accounting and Economics 43, 37-67.
[49] Demsetz, H., 1967, Toward a Theory of Property Rights, The American Economic Review, May, 347-359.
[50] Dhaliwal, D., KR Subramanyam, and R. Trezevant, 1999, Is comprehensive income superior to net income as a measure of firm performance? Journal of Accounting and Economics26, 43-67.
[51] Dodd, J.L. and Chen, S., 1996, EVA: a New Panacea? Business and Economics Review, July-August, 26-28.
[52] Easton, P. D., and T. S. Harris, 1991, Earnings as an explanatory variable for returns, Journal of Accounting Research29, 19-36.
[53] Eccher, A., Ramesh, K., Thiagarajan, S.R., 1996, Fair value disclosures bank holding companies, Journal of Accounting and Economics22, 79-117.
[54] Eccher, E. and Healy, P.M., 2000, The Role of International Accounting Standards in Transitional Economies: A Study of People's Republic of China, Working Paper, MIT Sloan School of Management, Harvard Business School.
[55] Ely, K., and Waymire, G., 1999, Accounting Standards-Setting Organization and Earnings Relevance: Longitudinal Evidence From NYSE Common Stocks, 1927-93, Journal of Accounting Research37, 293-317.
[56] Fama, E.F., 1965, The Behavior of Stock Market Prices, Journal of Business38, 34-105.
[57] Fan, J., T. J. Wong, and T. Zhang, 2009, Organizational Structure as a Decentralization Device: Evidence from Corporate Pyramids, Working Paper, Chinese University of Hong Kong, and City University of Hong Kong.
[58] Fan, J., T. J. Wong, and T. Zhang, 2009, Organizational Structure as a Decentralization Device: Evidence from Corporate Pyramids, Working Paper, Chinese University of Hong Kong, and City University of Hong Kong.
[59] Fan, J., Wong, T.J., 2002, Corporate ownership structure and the informativeness of accounting earnings in East Asia, Journal of Accounting and Economics33, 401-425.
[60] FASB, 1978, Objective of Financial Reporting by Business Enterprises, SFAC No.1, par.34-54.
[61] Feltham, G.A. and J.A.Ohlson, 1995, Valuation and Clean Surplus Accounting for Operation and Financial Activities, Contemporary Accounting Research11, 689-731.
[62] Francis, J., and K. Schipper, 1999, Have financial statements lost their relevance? Journal of Accounting Research37, 319-352.
[63] Francis, J., I. Khurana, R. Pereira, 2003, The role of accounting and auditing in corporate governance and the development of financial markets around the world, Asian-Pacific Journal of Accounting and Economics 10, 1-30.
[64] Francis, J., K. Schipper, L. Vincent, 2005, Earnings and Dividends Informativeness When Cash Flow Rights Are Separated from Voting Rights, Journal of Accounting and Economics39, 329-360.
[65] Friedman, M., 1953, The Case of Flexible Exchange Rate, In Essays in Positive Economic, Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
[66] Frost, C. A., E. Gordon., A. Hayes, 2006, Stock Exchange Disclosure and Market Development: An Analysis of 50 International Exchanges, Journal of Accounting Research44, 437-483.
[67] Giner, B., Rees, W., 2001, On the Asymmetric Recognition of Good and Bad News in France, Germany and the United Kingdom, Journal of Business Finance and Accounting28,1285-1331.
[68] Gomes, A., 2000, Going Public Without Governance: Managerial Reputation Effects, The Journal of Finance55, 615-646.
[69] Gu, Z.Y, 2007, Across-sample Incomparability of R2s and Additional Evidence on Value Relevance Changes Over Time, Journal of Business Finance and Accounting34,1073-1098.
[70] Guay, W., Verrecchia, R., 2006, Discussion of an economic framework for conservative accounting and Bushman and Piotroski, Journal of Accounting and Economics42, 149-165.
[71] Guenther, D.A. and D. Young, 2000, The Association Between Financial Accounting Measures and Real Economic Activity: A Multinational Study, Journal of Accounting and Economics29, 53-72.
[72] Harris, M.S., Muller, K., 1999, The market valuation of IAS versus U.S. GAAP accounting measures using form 20-F reconciliations, Journal of Accounting and Economics26,285-312.
[73] Harris, T., M. Lang, and H. Moller, 1994, The value relevance of German accounting measures: an empirical analysis, Journal of Accounting Research32, 187-209.
[74] Haw, I., D., Qi and W. Wu, 1998, Value relevance of Financial Reporting Disclosures in an Emerging Capital Market: The Case of B-shares and H-shares in China, Working Paper, Chinese University of Hong Kong.
[75] Haw, I., Qaqing, D., Wu, W., 2000, Timeliness of annual report releases and market reaction to earnings announcements in an emerging capital market: the case of China, Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting11, 108-131.
[76] Holthausen, R.W., 2003, Testing the relative power of accounting standards versus incentives and other institutional features to influence the outcome of financial reporting in an international setting, Journal of Accounting and Economics36,271-283.
[77] Holthausen, R.W., Watts, R.L., 2001, The relevance of the value relevance literature for financial accounting standard setting, Journal of Accounting and Economics31, 3-75.
[78] Hope, O., 2003, Disclosure Practices, Enforcement of Accounting Standards and Analyst Forecast Accuracy: An International Study, Journal of Accounting Research41, 235-272.
[79] Huijgen, C, Lubberink, M., 2005, Earnings Conservatism, Litigation and Contracting: The Case of Cross-Listed Firms, Journal of Business Finance and Accounting32, 1275-1309.
[80] Hung, M. G., 2001, Accounting Standards and Value Relevance of Financial Statements: An International Analysis, Journal of Accounting and Economics30, 401-420.
[81] Jaggi, B., P. Low, 2000, Impact of Culture, Market Forces, and Legal System on Financial Disclosures, International Journal of Accounting35,495-519.
[82] Jensen, M., and Meckling, W., 1976, Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs, and Ownership Structure, Journal of Financial Economics3, 305-360.
[83] Joos, P., 2003, Discussion of How Representative Are Firms That Are Cross-Listed in the United States? An Analysis of Accounting Quality, Journal of Accounting Research41,387-396.
[84] Joos, P., Lang, M., 1994, The effects of accounting diversity: evidence from the European Union, Journal of Accounting Research32, 141-168.
[85] Kothari, S.P., Zimmerman, J., 1995, Price and return models, Journal of Accounting and Economics20, 155-192.
[86] La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., 1999, Corporate Ownership around the World, Journal of Finance54, 471-517.
[87] La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., 2006, What Works in Securities Law, Journal of Finance6l, 1-32.
[88] La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., and Vishny, R., 1998, Law and Finance, Journal of Political Economy106, 1113-1155.
[89] La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., and Vishny, R., 2000a, Investor Protection and Corporate Governance, Journal of Financial Economics58, 3-27.
[90] La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., and Vishny, R., 2000b, Agency Problems and Dividend Policies around the World, Journal of Finance55, 1-33.
[91] La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., and Vishny, R., 2002, Investor Protection and Corporate Valuation, Journal of Finance51, 1147-1170.
[92] La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., Vishny, R., 1997, Legal determinants of external finance, Journal of Finance52, 1131-1150.
[93] Land, J., Lang, M.H., 2002, Empirical Evidence on the Evolution of International Earnings, The Accounting Review77, 115-133.
[94] Lang, M., Smith Raedy, J., Wilson, W., 2006, Earnings management and cross listing: are reconciled earnings comparable to U.S. earnings? Journal of Accounting and Economics42,255-283.
[95] Lang, M., Smith Raedy, J., Yetman, M.H, 2003, How Representative Are Firms That Are Cross-Listed in the United States? An Analysis of Accounting Quality, Journal of Accounting Research41, 363-386.
[96] Leuz, C, 2006, Cross listing, bonding and firms' reporting incentives: A discussion of Lang, Raedy and Wilson, Journal of Accounting and Economics42, 285-299.
[97] Leuz, C, Nanda, D., Wysocki, P., 2003, Earnings management and investor protection: an international comparison, Journal of Financial Economics69, 505-527.
[98] Lev, B., and Zarowin, P., 1999, The Boundaries of Financial Reporting and How to Extend Them, Journal of Accounting Research37, 353-385.
[99] Lev,B., 1989, On the Usefulness of Earnings: Lessons and Directions form Two Decades of Empirical Research, Journal of Accounting Research27(Supplement), 153-201.
[100] Livnat, J. and P.Zarowin, 1990, The Incremental Information Content of Cash Flow Components, Journal of Accounting and Economics13, 25-46.
[101] Miller, M.H., and F.Modigliani, 1966, Some Estimates of the Cost of Capital to the Electric Utility Industry, 1954-57, The American Economic Review56, 333-391.
[102] Morck, R., A., Shleifer, R. W., Vishny, 1988, Management Ownership and Market Valuation: An Empirical Analysis, Journal of Financial Economics20, 293-315.
[103] Nelson, K., 1996, Fair value accounting for commercial banks:an empirical analysis of SFAS No. 107, The Accounting Review71, 161-182.
[104] Newey, W., West, K., 1987, A simple positive-definite heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent covariance matrix, Econometrica55, 703-708.
[105] North, D. C., 1981, Structure and Change in Economic History, New York: Norton.
[106] North, D. C, 1990, Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[107] Ohlson, J., 1989, Ungarbled earnings and dividends: An analysis and extension of the Beaver, Lambert, and Morse valuation model, Journal of Accounting and Economics11,109-116.
[108] Ohlson, J., 1995, Earnings, Book Values, and Dividends in Equity Valuation, Contemporary Accounting Research 11, 661 -687.
[109] Pope, P., 2003, Discussion of Disclosure Practices, Enforcement of Accounting Standards and Analyst Forecast Accuracy: An International Study, Journal of Accounting Research41,273-283.
[110] Pope, P., Walker, M., 1999, International differences in the timeliness, conservatism, and classification of earnings, Journal of Accounting Research37, 53-87.
[111] Qian Wang, T.J. Wong, Lijun Xia, 2008, State ownership, the institutional environment, and auditor choice: Evidence from China, Journal of Accounting and Economics 46, 112-134.
[112] Rahman, A.R., 2006, Discussion of Earnings attributes and investor-protection: International evidence, The International Journal of Accounting41, 358-368.
[113] Raonic, I., McLeay, S., Asimakopoulos, I., 2004, The Timeliness of Income Recognition by European Companies: An Analysis of Institutional and Market Complexity, Journal of Business Finance and Accounting31, 115-148.
[114] Rees, L., Elgers, P., 1997, The market's valuation of non-reported accounting measures: retrospective reconciliations of non-U.S. and U.S. GAAP, Journal of Accounting Research 35,115-127.
[115] Scholes , M. , 1972 ,The Market for Securities : Substitution versus Price Pressure and the Effects of Information on Share Price, Journal of Business 45, 179-211.
[116] Schultz, T.W., 1978, Distortions of Agricultural Incentives, Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
[117] Sloan, R.J., 2001, Financial accounting information and corporate governance: a discussion, Journal of Accounting and Economics32, 335-347.
[118] Warfield, T., Wild, J., Wild, K., 1995, Managerial ownership, accounting choices and informativeness of earnings, Journal of Accounting and Economics20, 61-91.
[119] Watts, R. and J. Zimmerman, 1978, Towards a Positive Theory of the Determination of Accounting Standards, The Accounting Review53, 112-134.
[120] Watts, R. and J.Zimmerman, 1979, The Demand for and supply of Accounting Theories: The Market for Excuses, The Accounting Review 54, 273-305.
[121] White, H., 1980, A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matirx estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity, Econometrica48, 817-838.
[122] William R. Scott, 1997, Financial Accounting Theory, Prentice-Hall, Inc..