Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This paper analyzes a potential scale effect on the regression R² to determine if a scale factor can reconcile the arguments concerning the choice between the price levels model and the returns model. Analytically, it is shown that the scale effect depends on the unknown scale-free economic relation and is generally unpredictable. This makes it difficult to choose one model over the other on the basis of controlling for a scale problem. Empirically, it is shown that a scale factor cannot explain the observed discrepancy between the R² patterns from the levels and the returns models. The results support the view that the two models likely represent two different economic relations and that the model choice depends on the researcher's belief and the research question at hand rather than any scale factor concerns.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Barth

M. E.

Beaver

W. H.

Landsman

W. R.

. 2001. “The Relevance of the Value Relevance Literature for Financial Accounting Standard Setting: Another View”. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31 (September): 77–104.

Barth

M. E.

Clinch

. 1999. “Scale Effects in Capital Markets-based Accounting Research”. Working paper, Stanford University.

Barth

M. E.

Kallapur

. 1996. “The Effects of Cross-Sectional Scale Differences on Regression Results in Empirical Accounting Research”. Contemporary Accounting Research, 13 (Fall): 527–567.

Brown

Lys

. 1999. “Use of R² in Accounting Research: Measuring Changes in Value Relevance over the Last Four Decades”. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 28 (December): 83–115.

Brown

Lys

. 2002. “Erratum to ‘Use of R ² in Accounting Research: Measuring Changes in Value Relevance over the Last Four Decades”. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 33 (February): 141.

Collins

D. W.

Maydew

E. L.

Weiss

I. S.

. 1997. “Changes in the Value-Relevance of Earnings and Book Values over the Past Forty Years”. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 24 (December): 39–67.

Cramer

J. S.

1987. “Mean and Variance of R ² in Small and Moderate Samples”. Journal of Econometrics, 35 (July): 253–266.

Easton

P. D.

1998. “Discussion of Revalued Financial, Tangible, and Intangible Assets: Association with Share Prices and Non-Market-Based Value Estimates”. Journal of Accounting Research, 36 (Supplement): 235–247.

Easton

P. D.

Sommers

G. A.

. 2003. “Scale and Scale Effects in Market-based Accounting Research”. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 30 (January): 25–56.

10.

Francis

Schipper

. 1999. “Have Financial Statements Lost Their Relevance?” Journal of Accounting Research, 37 (Autumn): 319–352.

11.

Greene

1993. Econometric Analysis. 2nd ed. New York: MacMillan.

12.

2002. “Across-Sample Incomparability of R ²s and Additional Evidence on Value Relevance Changes over Time”. Working paper, Carnegie Mellon University.

13.

Guo

Ziebart

. 2000. “A General Analysis of the Impact of Scale Differences when Interpreting R ² as an Indicator of Value-Relevance”. Working paper, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

14.

Holthausen

R. W.

Watts

R. L.

. 2001. “The Relevance of the Value-relevance Literature for Financial Accounting Standard Setting”. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31 (September): 3–75.

15.

Lakonishok

Lev

. 1987. “Stock Splits and Stock Dividends: Why, Who and When”. Journal of Finance, 42 (September): 913–932.

16.

Landsman

Magliolo

. 1988. “Cross-Sectional Capital Market Research and Model Specification”. The Accounting Review, 63 (October): 586–604.

17.

McNichols

Dravid

. 1990. “Stock Dividends, Stock Splits and Signaling”. Journal of Finance, 45 (July): 857–879.

Scale Factor,R 2,and the Choice of Levels versus Returns Models

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References