The DOI matches its Crossref record; 90 of the 90 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Impact of Information Processing Costs on Firm Disclosure Choice: Evidence from the XBRL Mandate
Open accessAbstract
This paper examines the effect of market participants’ information processing costs on firms’ disclosure choice. Using the recent eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) regulation, I find that firms increase their quantitative footnote disclosures upon implementation of XBRL detailed tagging requirements designed to reduce information users’ processing costs. These results hold in a difference‐in‐difference design using matched nonadopting firms as controls, as well as two additional identification strategies. Examination of the disclosure increase by footnote type suggests that both regulatory and nonregulatory market participants play a role in monitoring firm disclosures. Overall, these findings suggest that the processing costs of market participants can be significant enough to impact firms’ disclosure decisions.
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
Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach
Becker, G. S. (1968) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/259394 · Cited by 13,999
Estimating Standard Errors in Finance Panel Data Sets: Comparing Approaches
Petersen, M. A. (2009) · Review of Financial Studies · doi:10.1093/rfs/hhn053 · Cited by 10,746
A Simple Model of Capital Market Equilibrium with Incomplete Information
MERTON, R. C. (1987) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1987.tb04565.x · Cited by 5,811
Regression discontinuity designs in economics
Lee, D. S., & Lemieux, T. (2010) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.48.2.281 · Cited by 4,534
Disclosure, Liquidity, and the Cost of Capital
DIAMOND, D. W., & VERRECCHIA, R. E. (1991) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1991.tb04620.x · Cited by 3,836
Enjoying the Quiet Life? Corporate Governance and Managerial Preferences
Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2003) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/376950 · Cited by 3,777
Regression discontinuity designs: A guide to practice
Imbens, G. W., & Lemieux, T. (2008) · Journal of Econometrics · doi:10.1016/j.jeconom.2007.05.001 · Cited by 3,694
On the impossibility of informationally efficient markets
Stiglitz, J. E., & Grossman, S. J. (1980) · Columbia University · doi:10.7916/d8765r99 · Cited by 3,645
Manipulation of the Running Variable in the Regression Discontinuity Design: A Density Test,
McCrary, J. (2008) · Journal of Econometrics · doi:10.1016/j.jeconom.2007.05.005 · Cited by 3,600
Disclosure level and the cost of equity capital.
Botosan, C. A. (1997) · The Accounting Review · doi:10.2308/tar-9709240185 · Cited by 3,436
Cited by
The evolution of 10-K textual disclosure: Evidence from Latent Dirichlet Allocation
Dyer, T., Lang, M., & Stice-Lawrence, L. (2017) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jacceco.2017.07.002 · Cited by 841
Textual analysis and international financial reporting: Large sample evidence
Lang, M., & Stice-Lawrence, L. (2015) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jacceco.2015.09.002 · Cited by 460
How to talk when a machine is listening: Corporate disclosure in the age of AI
Cao, S., Jiang, W., Yang, B., & Zhang, A. L. (2023) · The Review of Financial Studies · doi:10.1093/rfs/hhad021 · Cited by 222
Metadata
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: The Impact of Information Processing Costs on Firm Disclosure Choice: Evidence from the XBRL Mandate. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1475-679x.12268
- The paper
- BLANKESPOOR, E. (2019). The Impact of Information Processing Costs on Firm Disclosure Choice: Evidence from the XBRL Mandate. Journal of Accounting Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679x.12268
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.
