The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Common Institutional Ownership and Earnings Management*
Abstract
This study examines the relation between earnings management and block ownership of same‐industry peer firms by a common set of institutional investors (common institutional ownership). This relation is important given the tremendous growth of common institutional ownership and the significant influence of blockholders on financial reporting. We hypothesize that common institutional ownership mitigates earnings management by enhancing institutions' monitoring efficiency and by encouraging institutions to internalize the negative externality of a firm's earnings management on peer firms' investments. Consistent with our hypothesis, we find that higher common institutional ownership is related to less earnings management. Analyses of a quasi‐natural experiment based on financial institution mergers show that this negative relation is unlikely to be driven by the endogeneity of common institutional ownership. Cross‐sectional tests provide evidence that the negative relation is stronger among firms for which common institutional ownership is likely to generate a greater reduction in institutions' information acquisition and processing costs, and among firms whose severe financial misstatements are more likely to distort co‐owned peer firms' investments, supporting both mechanisms underlying our hypothesis. Our findings inform the ongoing debate on the costs and benefits of common institutional ownership by highlighting an important benefit: the enhanced monitoring of financial reporting.
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
Performance matched discretionary accrual measures
Kothari, S. P., Leone, A. J., & Wasley, C. E. (2005) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jacceco.2004.11.002 · Cited by 6,947
Earnings management through real activities manipulation
Roychowdhury, S. (2006) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jacceco.2006.01.002 · Cited by 5,405
DECHOW, P. M., SLOAN, R. G., & SWEENEY, A. P. (1996) · Contemporary Accounting Research · doi:10.1111/j.1911-3846.1996.tb00489.x · Cited by 4,065
The Effect of Audit Quality on Earnings Management*
BECKER, C. L., DEFOND, M. L., JIAMBALVO, J., & SUBRAMANYAM, K. R. (1998) · Contemporary Accounting Research · doi:10.1111/j.1911-3846.1998.tb00547.x · Cited by 3,222
The Influence of Institutional Investors on Myopic R&D Investment BehaviorPreprint
Bushee, B. J. (1998) · SSRN Electronic Journal · Cited by 3,198
The financial reporting environment: Review of the recent literature
Beyer, A., Cohen, D. A., Lys, T. Z., & Walther, B. R. (2010) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jacceco.2010.10.003 · Cited by 2,609
Accrual-based and real earnings management activities around seasoned equity offerings
Cohen, D. A., & Zarowin, P. (2010) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jacceco.2010.01.002 · Cited by 2,484
Text-Based Network Industries and Endogenous Product Differentiation
Hoberg, G., & Phillips, G. (2016) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/688176 · Cited by 2,095
Empirical research on accounting choice
Fields, T. D., Lys, T. Z., & Vincent, L. (2001) · Journal of Accounting and Economics · doi:10.1016/s0165-4101(01)00028-3 · Cited by 1,759
Why Has IPO Underpricing Changed Over Time
Tim Loughran, B., & Ritter, J. R. (2004) · Cited by 1,611
Metadata
- Authors
- Ramalingegowda, S., Utke, S., & Yu, Y.
- Venue
- Contemporary Accounting Research
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2020-11-28
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 208-241
- ISSN
- 0823-9150 (ISSN-L)
- 1911-3846
- OpenAlex
- W3037983570
- Cited by
- 293
- References
- 64
- FWCI
- 33.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Common Institutional Ownership and Earnings Management*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1911-3846.12628
- The paper
- Ramalingegowda, S., Utke, S., & Yu, Y. (2021). Common Institutional Ownership and Earnings Management*. Contemporary Accounting Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12628
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.