The study of disclosure extent and its relationship with
non-financial characteristics of companies accepted in the
stock exchange organization of Tehran-Iran
Dr. Ghadirimogham, Abolfasl1
Abstract
The economic decision makings require information generally resulting
from accounting system. In fact, the final goal of decisions made by users of
financial reports is the optimal allotment of economic resources to profitable
activities so that it is provided an economic growth and prosperity. Financial
reporting reveals the allotment of capital resources in a trade company and
its profitability capacity. It is clear that the disclosure principle, as one of the
accounting principles, expresses all important and relevant facts concerned
with events and activities of trade unit. Without pressures from outside the
organization and legal and professional requirements, however, the trade
units don’t tend to reveal financial data adequately. Unwillingness to
sufficient disclosure is likely to relate to the characteristics of companies and
main issue of this research is the study of the effects of non-financial
characteristics on the disclosure extent. Studied non-financial characteristics
include:
1. The number of shareholders,
2. Acceptance record in stock exchange,
3. The kind of industry that company has activity in (manufacturing or
service),
4. The kind of auditing institution, and
5. Directorate’s composition.
Keywords: disclosure, non-financial characteristics, number of shareholders,
acceptance record in stock exchange, kind of industry, kind of auditing
institute, directorate’s composition.
Introduction
Accounting, like other areas of human activities has been created in order to
meet the human’s social and economic needs. In the course of time those
techniques and accounting principles, parallel to society development and
increase of complexities, have developed to meet created information needs.
Without this information, many plans of economic development couldn’t be
appeared. In the past, the people of different civilizations have recorded their
economic activities in different ways such as recording on slates. The
development of economic and commercial activities led into the innovation
1
Member of scientific broad of accounting department of Ferdowsi University
1
of bookkeeping system entitled double bookkeeping. When the industrial
revolution happened in the middle of 18th century, many social and
economic changes occurred and caused to the change of production methods
from manual and traditional to mechanical production. Manufacturing units
became big and complex quickly and competition between producers
increased correspondingly.
The industrial revolution in Europe created big factories that required
considerable resources. This need created a type of organization called
company which finally led into the creation of corporate companies.
Funding this capital by one or few persons was impossible, so considerable
investments were done by absorbing small capitals by corporate companies.
However investors’ decision for investing depends on the existence of
proper information. Logical and intellectual investor has always tried to
reveal ambiguities and achieve clear reasons in order to make advantageous
economic decisions to obtain correct information. In the course of time, the
ownership and management of companies were separated and owners chose
people as manager for directing the company. These investors controlled
managers’ activities only indirectly. Increasing the number of this kind of
stockholders and owners increased accounting branches, so accounting
information not only were used for directing operations and activities of the
company, but also stockholders inclined to accounting information for
controlling operations and making economic decisions. Potential investors,
creditors and other beneficiaries requested financial data in the case of future
position and prospect of the company. Above events resulted in an
accounting definition to be formed as follow:
1. Accounting is an information system through which required
information of investors, stockholders, creditors and other concerned
persons are provided for decision making.
2. Accounting is an information system; this system as a subset of
management information systems processes financial data.
Although the user of the most products of this information system is the
manager of an economic unit, management, based on duties and
responsibilities that he has against different groups of users of financial data
and also liabilities or requests of trade parties or financial providers of
economic units, provides different information for users outside of the
economic units. Annual financial reports are one of the most important
2
products of accounting information systems which are presented in a
particular framework for different groups of outside users of financial data.2
Based on the view of Financial Accounting Standard Board (FASB),
investors and creditors’ decisions and their use of information are more
spreading than other outside groups and for this reason their decisions have
main effects on allocation of economic resources of a country.
Since the investors and creditors are two main groups of extraorganizational
users of financial data and providing information for these two groups is one
of the main callings of management and accounting systems, so it is
necessary to particulately advert the type of informational needs of these
persons. Considering the given users extrapolate financial reports as one of
the main resources of financial information about economic units for
decision making, so financial reporting based on the view of Financial
Accounting Standard Board should provide information to be useful for
potential and de facto investors, creditors and other users in decision making
of investing and giving credit and other similar decisions.
Financial reporting reveals the allotment of capital resources in a trade
company and its profitability. On the other hand, for accounting information
to be useful in decision making of given persons, the purposes of accounting
and financial reporting compel that the related information is completely and
properly revealed. Disclosure is a comprehensive word in accounting and is
known as a disclosure principle which includes rather whole process of
financial reporting and affects whole financial aspects.3
So the issue of information disclosure in annual financial reports has
obtained a specific importance especially in prosperous years of researches
based on market reaction against accounting information.
Research issue
The extent of information disclosure in the annual reports of companies
depends on factors like government pressures, legal and professional
requirements and the characteristics of the company itself. It can be said the
most important purpose of this research is determination of the effects of
non-financial characteristics on comprehensiveness of annual reports and
considering the studied non-financial characteristics in this research include
the acceptance record of company in stock exchange, the type of industry,
the number of stockholders, the type of auditing institution and the
Arab Mazar Yazdi, Mohammad”Cumulative Informational Content of Cash and
Promissory Flows”, PH.D thesis, Tehran University, 1995.
3
Eidon S.Hendriksen, Accounting Theory,5 th.ed.IRWIN,199,p.854
2
3
composition of directorate, in this research we meditate to study the effects
of these variables on extent of information disclosure in the annual reports.
Conducted researches in Iran on the research issue
Two researches on the research issue have heretofore conducted in Iran.
1. In 1997 the first research was conducted by Mr.Malekian on the
comprehensiveness of annual reports and financial characteristics of
accepted companies in Tehran stock exchange. He has examined the
correlation of five variables including the size of company, the ratio
of debts to stockholders’ equity, net sales, the ratio of revenue before
taxation to stockholders’ equity, and the ratio of revenue before
taxation to net sales with comprehensiveness of annual reports. To
determine the comprehensiveness rate of annual reports, he has
prepared a checklist using a questionnaire and measured the
comprehensiveness of annual reports by it. The results of the
examination confirmed only significant correlation between the size
of company, the ratio of debts and shareholders’ equity, net sales and
the ratio of revenue before taxation to net sales.
2. In 1998 another research has conducted by Dr. NooriFard, Yadollah
on the information disclosure in financial reports of companies. In
this research, he measured the information disclosure in companies
using an index of 55 cases and studied relationship between assets
rate, margin, and the type of industry by using it. The results of the
research show that there is a significant correlation between assets
rate and margin with disclosure rate in annual reports and it hasn’t
seen any significant correlation between the type of industry and the
extent of disclosure.
Researches in other countries
Accounting information disclosure has attracted the researchers’ attention at
least since the 1960s. In view of present research, foreign researches on
disclosure can be divided in two groups:
1. The first group is questionnaire researches, and
2. The second group is researches in which different indices have been
used for measuring the extent of disclosure in annual reports.
1. The first group
In the first group, they have designed indices for ranking the disclosure cases
through designing a questionnaire and conducted statistic tests related to
ranking disclosure rate, which some of them are as follow:
1-1. Alan Robert Cerf performed a research in 1961 about reporting of
companies and investing decisions in United State. He concluded
4
that the quality of financial reporting disclosure of companies is
influenced by some variables and often there is no correlation
between these variables. He specified the indices of information
disclosure in the annual reports based on:
a. studying the process of investors’ decision making,
b. studying the accounting literature related to decision making,
c. interviewing with analyzers of securities market, and
d. studying the analyzers’ reports.
Cerf’s formulated information disclosure index has been limited to 31cases.
1-2. In 1971 another research has been done by Singhvi and Desai in
the United State entitled the experimental analysis of the quality of
financial disclosure of companies. In view of these researchers, the
information disclosure of trade units can be done in different ways,
the annual report to stockholders indeed is the most important way
of information disclosure of trade unit. The samples investigated
by these researchers were 100 companies which are accepted in the
securities market and 50 companies which aren’t accepted. Studied
variables in this research are:
a. total assets,
b. the number of stockholders,
c. the kind of auditing institution,
d. the return rate of investigating, and
e. margin.
The results of this research show that there is a significant relationship
between disclosure extent, the number of stockholders, the kind of auditing
institution and margin and there isn’t any significant relationship between
disclosure extent and return rate of investing.
1-3. Another research, entitled the information selection and its
disclosure in the annual reporting of the United State, was done by
Buzby. In this research, he designed a questionnaire containing 39
cases of financial and non-financial data which is used in annual
reporting. Based on obtained results of the answers of financial
analyzers to questions of questionnaire, only 34 cases of this
information were used as a basis for measuring the disclosure
extent in the annual reporting. Above researches show that the
users of financial statements appreciate the disclosure cases
differently.
2. The second group
5
The second group of researches includes those of Cook, Wallace and
collogues in which different indices have been used for measuring the extent
of disclosure in annual reports, these researches are as follow:
2-1. In 1992 Cook conducted a research entitled the effects of size,
being in stock market, and type of industry on disclosure in the
listed annual reports in Japan. The purpose of this research has
been studying the disclosure extent in the annual reports of
Japanese companies and measuring the independent variables
(size, being in stock market and type of industry) affecting the
extent of disclosure. Results show that there is a significant
correlation between sizes of company, type of industry, and being
in stock market list.
2-2. In 1994 an empirical research was conducted by Wallace et al on
the relationship between annual reports of companies and
characteristics of these companies in Spain.
The results of the researches can be outlined as follow:
1. Sample companies with more financial structure (total assets and ratio
of debts to shareholders’ equity) tend to offer more extent of
disclosure and with less financial structure tend to offer less disclosure
rate in their annual reports.
2. Sample companies with better performance and higher cash tend to
less disclosure and vice versa.
3. Accepted companies in stock exchange of Madrid and Valencia
(Spain) tend to more comprehensive information disclosure than
unaccepted companies.
4. It wasn’t seen any significant correlation between the industry type of
sample companies and auditing institution of these companies with
the extent of disclosure.
The hypotheses of research
The hypotheses of research are as follow:
1. There is a significant correlation between the acceptance record of
company in the stock market and the extent of disclosure in the annual
reports.
2. There is a significant difference between the extent of disclosure in
the annual reports of manufacturing and service industries.
3. There is a significant correlation between the number of stockholders
and the extent of disclosure in the annual reports.
4. There is a significant difference between the extents of disclosure in
the annual reports which are audited by auditing organization
comparing to those which are audited by individual institutes.
6
5. There is a significant difference between the extent of disclosure in
the annual reports of companies with the private and state composition
of directorate.
Methodology
The research observations were collected, processed and then analyzed by
following statistical methods:
a. Descriptive methods: at first, the observations are described by the
descriptive statistical methods including the statistical tables, the
statistical diagrams and central inclination and dispersal indices.
b. Inferential methods: then, the observations are analyzed by the
inferential statistical methods such as T-test independent twosample or its equivalent in non-parameter like median test or ManWhitney-Wilcakson (M.W.W), the significant test of Pearson
linear correlation coefficient , linear regression analysis, and so on.
All of the description and analysis stages of information are performed by
statistical software Spss version 12.0.
Data collection method
For collecting data, the library method will be used to formulate the research
topic literature and for accessing to required data, the information included
in the financial reports will be used as follow to process the hypotheses of
this research:
Studying and analyzing of financial reports of sample companies are done
by using the checklist of information disclosure cases provided of Iran
accounting standards and confirmed by professional experts (respective
checklist has been shown in the appendix of paper) and necessary data is
obtained for testing the hypothesizes.
Statistical society
The statistical society of this research is all of the accepted companies in
Tehran securities and exchange which have accepted to the end of 2002 and
have the following characteristics:
1. It wasn’t removed from accepted companies list during studied three
years.
2. The end of their financial year is 12.29.
3. The composition of directorate hasn’t been changed.
Statistical sample
Utilized sample in this research is selected through random simple sampling
from statistical society and their financial reports are used and considering
the primary data which shows descriptive variables, particularly the number
7
of stockholders, can express at least 43% of total dispersal of dependent
variable (disclosure extent). In a significance test, Pearson linear correlation
coefficient with 95% confidence, at least 52 companies, provides 90.2%
power. Table 1 shows the sample companies which selected through random
simple sampling from the qualified companies (statistical society).
Table1- Sample Companies
row
the name of company
row
the name of company
1
Zahravi Pharmacy
27
Iran Transformer
2
Iran Behnosh
28
Iran Brake Lining
3
Pichak Public Company
29
Petrochemistry Road Transit
4
Parsseram
30
Parse Oil Company
5
Absal
31
Iran Poilin Company
6
House Investing
32
Bonyad Polypropylene Yarn
Company
7
Parsian Bank
33
Mashhad Carton
8
Oil Industry Investing
34
Ardel Investing
9
Mine and Metals
35
Avangan
Development Investing
10 General Industrial Company
36
Iran Ball bearing Company
11
Gorji Biscuit
37
Kaf Public Company
12
Shahin Plastic
38
Informatics Services
13 Rangin Chemical Industries
39
Iran Data Processing
14
Karafarin Bank
40
Bahman Group
15 Rahshad Sepahan Company
41
National Bank Investing
16
Sadid Pipe and Equipment
42 Pars Can Manufacturing Company
17
Eghtesadnovin Bank
43
Tehran Cement Company
18 Takinco Technical Inspection 44
Pars Tooshe Investing
and Corrosion Control
19
Behpak Industrial
45 Behshar Industries Investing Group
20 Shahid Ghandi Signal Cable
46
Sina Chemical Industries
21
Kashan Velvet and Silk
47
Parskhazar Industrial Company
22
Toos Weaving Company
48
Pak Pasteurized Dairy
23
Azadi Fabric
49
Pars Tile
24
Ruzdaru Pharmacy
50 Investing of Sadid Industrial Group
25
Alborz Daru
51
Iran Combine
26
Kosar Pharmacy
52
Bahman Manufacturing
The introduction of research variables
Concerning the research hypotheses, variables are:
8
1. the number of shareholders,
2. acceptance record of company in stock market,
3. the kind of industry,
4. the kind of auditing institute,
5. the composition of directorate.
Studied variables and their category are shown in table2. In this
represent these variables briefly:
Table 2- Studied variables and their categories
Row
Variable name Specifi Variable kind Definition
c name
in the
model
1
Disclosure extent
Y
Quantitative
Through
dependent
checklist
2
Company
X1
Quantitative
Through
acceptance
independent
financial
record in stock
inventories
exchange
3
The number of
X2
Quantitative
Through
stockholders
independent
financial
inventories
4
Industry kind
X3
Qualitative
X3=1
independent manufacturi
ng
X3=0service
5
Auditing institute
X4
Qualitative
X4=1
kind
independent
Auditing
institute
X4=0private
auditing
institute
6
Directorate
X5
Qualitative X5=1private
composition
independent composition
X5=0public
composition
9
section we
Measure
Relative
Relative
Relative
Nominal
Nominal
Nominal
Disclosure: the obvious presentation of a reality or a position in the financial
reports. Following relationship is used for calculating the extent of
disclosure in sample companies:
Y=ΣB/ΣA
A= cases should be revealed
B= cases have been revealed
Above method adapted from a research by a scientist named Cock who
studied in Japan.
Acceptance record of company in stock market: In this research, the
acceptance record of company in stock market is the age of company from
date that accepted date in Tehran securities and exchange.
Type of industry: In this research, industries are divided into two groups:
1.manufacturing industries, 2.service industries
Type of auditing institute: the intent of auditing institute type is two kinds
of auditing institutes as follow:
a. auditing institutes dependent on finance ministry (auditing
organization)
b. private institutes
The composition of directorate: In this research, there are two kinds of
composition:
1. Companies which at least 51% of their shares are in possession
of governmental companies or public institutions.
2. Companies which at least 51% of their shares are in possession
of private sector or private investors.
Data analysis
Research on accounting issues especially empirical researches has many
difficulties in Iran. Some researchers due to the lack of appropriate
structures for accounting researches course the sever way of the scientific
studying and investigating by spending time and energy that are irrelevant to
research topic. Present research has not been safe too. In many of studying,
easy access to companies’ reports (at least financial inventories with their
notes) is a necessity, while access to this information is often difficult. Even
about the accepted companies in stock exchange, which the information of
their financial inventories should be published publicly on stated time, this
information is available irregularly. Direct going to companies for access to
information is often ineffectual or a desirable result doesn’t come.
The examination of research hypothesizes
The examination of first hypothesis:
10
The significance test of Pearson linear correlation coefficient has been used
for studying the relationship between the extent of disclosure and acceptance
record in stock market.
Test analysis: Concerning table 3, the results of significant test of Pearson
linear correlation coefficient indicate that the extent of correlation between
these two variables in years of 2002,2003,2004 is 0.8,-0.22,-0.051
respectively, concerning P- value which are more than 0.05, this
relationship is not statistically significant .
Obtained data in studied years don’t confirm research hypothesis (H1). Since
the hypothesis (H1) is rejected in this case, then our claim based on
significant relationship between disclosure extent and acceptance record in
stock exchange is rejected in5%error level.
Table 3- results obtained of first hypothesis examination
Considered years
Correlation
P-Value
H1
coefficient
2002
0.008
0.956
Rejected
2003
-0.022
0.876
Rejected
2004
-0.051
0.722
Rejected
The examination of second hypothesis
The information of table4 shows the average extent of disclosure of
manufacturing and service companies in years 2002, 2003, 2004 including
16 service companies and 36manufaturing. Since the number of samples in
service companies group is less than 30(n< 30), so if we want to compare
the extent of disclosure of two service and manufacturing groups with T-test,
it is required to study the normality of dependent variable (extent of
disclosure).
Table4. The distribution of disclosure extent of companies in terms of
Company type
Considered Company type
Number Average extents
Standard
year
of disclosure
deviation of
disclosure
extent
2002
Service
16
0.818
0.0844
Manufacturing
36
0.844
0.0484
2003
Service
16
0.814
0.088
Manufacturing
36
0.850
0.053
2004
Service
16
0.827
0.0758
Manufacturing
36
0.857
0.0493
11
Concerning table 5, two groups of studied companies (service and
manufacturing) don’t have any significant difference (P-Value>0.05) with
the distribution of disclosure extent in years 2002 and 2004, but in2003, due
to P-Value<-0.05, there is a significant difference in the disclosure extent of
companies. T-test for comparing the disclosure extent of the service and
manufacturing companies indicates that in an error level of 5%, there is not
any significant difference between disclosure extent of this two groups (PValue>0 .05). Also, 95% confidence interval for difference between the
average extents of disclosure of these two groups in studied years shows that
low limit and high limit of the difference of the extent of disclosure of these
two groups is in table 5, respectively.
Table 5- the results of second hypothesis examination
Considered P-Value(the
P-Value(the Hypothesis
Confidence
year
distribution
comparison
H1
interval
of disclosure of disclosure
Low
High
extent)
extent)
Limit
Limit
2002
0.059
0.159
Rejected
-0.0636 0.0107
2003
0.032
0.139
Rejected
-0.0861 0.0128
2004
0.117
0.097
Rejected
-0.0656 0.0563
The examination of third hypothesis
The significant test of Pearson linear correlation coefficient has been used
to study the relationship between the extent of disclosure and the number of
stockholders.
Concerning table 6, the results of significant test of Pearson linear
correlation coefficient indicate that the extent of correlation between these
two variables in 2002,2003 and 2004 are -0.067,-0.087,-0.102 ,respectively;
this relationship was obtained by P-Value which is more than 0.05 and isn’t
statistically significant.
Table 6- the results of third hypothesis examination
Considered year
Correlation
P-Value
Hypothesis H1
coefficient
2002
-0.067
0.635
Rejected
2003
-0.087
0.541
Rejected
2004
-0.102
0.477
Rejected
The obtained data in studied years don’t imply the confirmation of research
hypothesis (H1), since the hypothesis (H1) is rejected in this case, so in a
12
5%error level, our claim based on the existence of significant relationship
between disclosure extent and the number of stockholders is rejected.
The examination of forth hypothesis
Two independent samples T-test is used for studying the above hypothesis.
The data of table 7 indicate the average extents of disclosure of companies
audited by auditing organization and the other private institutes in years
2002, 2003 and 2004.
Table 7- the distribution of disclosure extent of companies in terms of the
kind of auditing institute
Considered
The kind of Number Average extents
Standard
year
auditing
of disclosure
deviation of
institute
disclosure
extent
2002
Private
33
0.819
0.067
Auditing
19
0.865
0.0398
institute
*2003
Private
34
0.827
0.0719
Auditing
17
0.859
0.0517
institute
**2004
Private
37
.084
0.0624
Auditing
13
0.864
0.049
institute
*the kind of auditing institute of one company isn’t specified in 2003
**the kind of auditing institute of two companies isn’t specified in 2004
Concerning table 8, there is no significant difference between two groups of
studied companies in2002, 20003, and 2004 with the distribution of
disclosure extent (P-Value>0.05). T-test used to compare the extent of
disclosure of companies audited by these two groups in 2002 indicates that
in a 5% error level there is a significant difference between the extent of
disclosure of these two groups (P-Value<0.05), but in 2003 and 2004 in a
5% error level there is no significant difference in the extent of disclosure of
companies, P-Value>0.05. Also, the low limit and high limit of the variance
of 95% confidence interval for difference between average extents of
disclosure of two groups of companies audited by auditing organization and
private institutes in studied years have been shown in table8.
Obtained data don’t imply the confirmation of research hypothesis (H1),
since the researcher’s hypothesis is rejected in this case, so in a 5% error
level our claim based on the existence of difference in disclosure extent
13
between companies audited by private institutions and companies audited by
auditing organization is rejected.
Table 8- the results of forth hypothesis examination
Considered
PPHypothesi Confidence interval
year
Value(distrib Value(compa
s H1
ution of
rison of
Low
High
disclosure
disclosure
limit
limit
extent)
extent)
2002
0.084
0.010
Confirmed -0.0795
-0.0115
2003
0.263
0.117
Rejected
-0.0706
-0.0081
2004
0.502
0.226
Rejected
-0.0619
0.00149
The examination of fifth hypothesis
Independent two samples T-test was used for studying above hypothesis.
The data of table 9 shows the average extents of disclosure of companies
with governmental composition of directorate and private one in 2002,
2003and2004.
Table9- the distribution of disclosure extent of companies in terms of
directorate composition
Considered
Type of
Number
Average
Standard
year
directorate
extents of
deviation of
disclosure
disclosure
extent
2002
Governmental
24
0.846
0.0443
2003
2004
Private
28
0.828
0.074
Governmental
24
0.846
0.0502
Private
28
0.834
0.0793
Governmental
24
0.851
00.0468
Private
28
0.844
0.0639
Concerning table10, two groups of studied companies (governmental and
private directorate) don’t have any significant difference with distribution of
disclosure extent in 2003 and 2004 (P-Value >0.05) but considering the
14
obtained P-Value is less than 0.05 in 2002, there is a significant difference
between two groups of studied companies with the distribution disclosure
extent. T-test for comparing the disclosure extent of these two groups in
studied years shows that there is no significant difference between the
disclosure extent of these two groups in a 5%error level (P-Value>0.05).
Also the low limit and high limit of disclosure extent variance in a 95%
confidence interval for difference between the average extents of disclosure
of two groups of studied companies in these years have been shown in Table
10.
Table 10- the results of fifth hypothesis examination
Considered P-Value(the
P-Value(the
Hypothesis Confidence
year
distribution
comparison
H1
interval
of disclosure of disclosure
Low
High
extent)
extent)
limit
limit
2002
0.026
0.286
Rejected
-0.0155
0.0515
2003
0.103
0.525
Rejected
-0.0256
0.0497
2004
0.165
0.687
Rejected
-0.0272
0.041
Obtained data don’t imply the confirmation of research hypothesis (H1),
since the hypothesis (H1) is rejected in this case, so in a 5% error level our
claim based on the existence of difference in disclosure extent between
companies with governmental and private directorate is rejected.
The obtained results of studying the research hypotheses are as follow:
1. Considering the results of the examination of first hypothesis in
studied years, we conclude that there is no significant relationship
between the acceptance record of company in stock market and the
extent of disclosure in the annual reports.
2. Studying the second hypothesis, we conclude that there is no
significant difference between the disclosure extent of the
manufacturing and service industries. The result of this hypothesis
examination correspond with the results of Wallace et al research in
15
1994, but it contrasts with the results of Cook research in 1992 and
Noori fard in 1995.
3. The results of analyzing third hypothesis show that there is not any
significant relationship between the extent of disclosure and the
number of stockholders. The obtained result contrasts with the
findings of Singoy and Desay’s research in 1971.
4. After analyzing forth hypothesis, it was specified that there is no
significant difference between the extent of disclosure in reports
investigated by auditing organization and ones investigated by
individual institutes.
The obtained result of examination of this hypothesis corresponds with
the result of research conducted by Wallace et al in 1994 but it contrasts
with the result of research conducted by Singoy and Desay in 1992.
5. The results of fifth hypothesis examination suggest that there is no
significant difference between the extent of disclosure in the annual
reports of companies with governmental and private composition of
directorate.
Suggestions
Considering the told subjects, we can suggest following items for
researchers:
Suggestions based on the results of research
1. Auditing organization that is responsible for enacting auditing
standards in Iran, should take the results of this research into
account to formulate the standards of annual reporting.
2. Tehran securities organization which has a key role in
formulating the regulations related to information disclosure
should take the findings of research into account.
16
References:
Persian references:
1- Azar, Adel. 1998, “The Statistics and its application in management”,
SAMT Publication of Tehran, vol.1, 2
2- Badri, Ahmad.1993”Accounting Information and Multi-behavioral
Decision-making”, accounting reviews, no.2
3-Berch & Gary Grad Nitzkey, John J, 1992 “Accounting Systems in
Theory and Practice”, Translated by Gheiby, Manoochehr, The Center of
Teaching Governmental Management, Tehran .
4- Khaki, Gholamreza, 2003, “Methodology by an Attitude to Thesis
writing”, Baztab Publication.
5- Riahi Bloki, Ahmad, 2002, “Accounting Theory”, translated by
Dr.Parsian, Ali, Cultural researches Office, Tehran.
6- Shabahag, Reza, 2002, “Accounting Theory”, the Specialized Center of
Accounting and Auditing of Auditing Organization, vol.1
7- Shahidi, Mohammad Hasan, 2002, “Methodology in Social Sciences”,
The Economic Faculty.
8- Alivar, Aziz, “the Essential Financial Inventories”, Auditing
Organization, 3th.ed, No.76.
9- Alimadad, Mostafa, “Accounting Principles”, Auditing Organization
Publication.No.78.
10- Arab Mazar Yazdi, Mohammad, 1995, “Cumulative Informational
Content of Cash and Promissory Flows”, PH.D Thesis, Tehran
University.
11- The Committee of Preparing the Accounting Standards, “Accounting
Standards”, Auditing Organization, 5&6th.ed.
12- Sampirit Chatr J, Ali S. Hadi & Bretram Price, 2002, “Regression
Analysis with Example”, Translated by Dr. Niroomand, Hosseinali.
13- Noorifard, Yadollah, 1998, “Information Disclosure in Financial
Reports of Companies”, Auditing Organization of Social Security.
17
18