The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The effectiveness of regulatory disclosure policies
Open accessAbstract
Regulatory transparency—mandatory disclosure of information by private or public institutions with a regulatory intent—has become an important frontier of government innovation. This paper assesses the effectiveness of such transparency systems by examining the design and impact of financial disclosure, nutritional labeling, workplace hazard communication, and five other diverse systems in the United States. We argue that transparency policies are effective only when the information they produce becomes “embedded” in the everyday decision‐making routines of information users and information disclosers. This double‐sided embeddedness is the most important condition for transparency systems' effectiveness. Based on detailed case analyses, we evaluate the user and discloser embeddedness of the eight major transparency policies. We then draw on a comprehensive inventory of prior studies of regulatory effectiveness to assess whether predictions about effectiveness based on characteristics of embeddedness are consistent with those evaluations. © 2006 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
(1982) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511809477 · Cited by 8,240
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.39.4.341 · Cited by 6,544
A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality.
Kahneman, D. (2003) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.58.9.697 · Cited by 5,540
(2000) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511803475 · Cited by 2,987
Public Regulation of the Securities Markets
Stigler, G. J. (1964) · The Journal of Business · doi:10.1086/294677 · Cited by 679 · cited 1×
“While some economists have questioned the need for mandated financial transparency systems and their effectiveness (Stigler, 1964; Benston, 1973), a growing literature suggests that financial reporting has been effective both in reducing investor risks and in improving corporate governance.”
Background
Cited by
Full Disclosure: The Perils and Promise of Transparency
Fung, A., Graham, M., & Weil, D. (2007) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511510533 · Cited by 752
Self-citationHow firms respond to being rated
Chatterji, A. K., & Toffel, M. W. (2010) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.840 · Cited by 547
The Consequences of Mandatory Corporate Sustainability Reporting
Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2011) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1799589 · Cited by 484
Accountability and corporate governance of public private partnerships
Shaoul, J., Stafford, A., & Stapleton, P. (2012) · Critical Perspectives on Accounting · doi:10.1016/j.cpa.2011.12.006 · Cited by 241
OECD (2010) · doi:10.1787/9789264079663-en · Cited by 54
Grimmelikhuijsen, S., de Vries, F., & Bouwman, R. (2024) · Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory · doi:10.1093/jopart/muad010 · Cited by 45
Our Students…Our Campus…Their Community: Analyzing Institutional Civic Engagement Websites
Hutchings, Q. R., & Morgan, D. L. (2024) · Innovative Higher Education · doi:10.1007/s10755-023-09662-9 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Weil, D., Fung, A., Graham, M., & Fagotto, E.
- Venue
- Journal of Policy Analysis and Management
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-11-23
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 155-181
- ISSN
- 0276-8739 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-6688
- OpenAlex
- W1975907211
- Cited by
- 313
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 19.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.