The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
When the Use of Positive Language Backfires: The Joint Effect of Tone, Readability, and Investor Sophistication on Earnings Judgments
Open accessAbstract
Recent studies document that market participants react positively to the positive language sentiment or tone embedded in financial disclosures, and that investors’ reactions to negative news are more muted with poor disclosure readability. However, while language sentiment and readability co‐occur in practice, their joint effects remain largely unexplored. In an experiment with MBA students as participants, we investigate how the effect of language sentiment varies with readability and investor sophistication level. We find that language sentiment influences investors’ judgments when readability is low, but not when readability is high. Specifically, when readability is low, disclosures couched in positive language lead to higher earnings judgments for less sophisticated investors, but lower earnings judgments for more sophisticated investors. These findings show that the main effects of readability and language sentiment documented in prior studies have boundary effects, and may reverse when both variables are jointly considered along with investor sophistication.
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
Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling.
MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.1.2.130 · Cited by 10,418
Reliability and Validity Assessment
Carmines, E., & Zeller, R. (1979) · doi:10.4135/9781412985642 · Cited by 5,884
Chaiken, S. (1980) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.39.5.752 · Cited by 5,516
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4964-1 · Cited by 5,219
Reliability and Validity Assessment
(2011) · The Encyclopedia of Political Science · doi:10.4135/9781608712434.n1341 · Cited by 5,040
Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change
Marquart, F., & Naderer, B. (2016) · Schlüsselwerke der Medienwirkungsforschung · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-09923-7_20 · Cited by 4,993
Giving content to investor sentiment: The role of media in the stock market
TETLOCK, P. C. (2007) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.2007.01232.x · Cited by 4,827
Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming, Third Edition
Byrne, B. M. (2016) · doi:10.4324/9781315757421 · Cited by 4,653
RATIONAL CHOICE AND THE FRAMING OF DECISIONS
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1988) · Decision Making · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511598951.011 · Cited by 3,712
Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1986) · The Journal of Business · doi:10.1086/296365 · Cited by 3,622
Metadata
- Authors
- TAN, H., YING WANG, E., & ZHOU, B.
- Venue
- Journal of Accounting Research
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-01-21
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 273-302
- ISSN
- 0021-8456 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-679X
- OpenAlex
- W2120277987
- Cited by
- 299
- References
- 46
- FWCI
- 28.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: When the Use of Positive Language Backfires: The Joint Effect of Tone, Readability, and Investor Sophistication on Earnings Judgments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1475-679x.12039
- The paper
- TAN, H., YING WANG, E., & ZHOU, B. (2014). When the Use of Positive Language Backfires: The Joint Effect of Tone, Readability, and Investor Sophistication on Earnings Judgments. Journal of Accounting Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679x.12039
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.