ORCID Profile
0000-0003-4939-180X
Current Organisation
UNSW Sydney
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: American Accounting Association
Date: 24-09-2020
DOI: 10.2308/AJPT-18-092
Abstract: We examine whether CSR assurance increases investors' fundamental value estimates, whether this effect depends on the type of assurance (reasonable versus limited), and whether investors are prompted to explicitly assess the company's performance. We conduct a 3 × 2 between-subjects experiment, with CSR assurance being manipulated at three levels (no assurance, limited assurance, and reasonable assurance) and explicit assessment at two levels (no explicit assessment and explicit assessment). We find that when there is no prompt to explicitly assess performance, the investors who receive an assurance report at a reasonable level derive higher fundamental value estimates than the investors who receive CSR information that is not assured or assured at a limited level. Investors who receive either a reasonable or limited assurance level report perceive the information to be more reliable than the investors who receive CSR information that is not assured, regardless of the prompt for explicit assessment.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 26-12-2022
DOI: 10.1111/ACFI.13041
Abstract: We investigate how a disclosed risk item and key audit matter (KAM) relatedness combine to affect investors' riskiness assessment in financial and non‐financial contexts. When management disclose a high‐risk item, we find that investors react the same way across contexts with KAM relatedness having no effect. When management disclose a low‐risk item, investors react differently in each context. When a KAM is related to the disclosed financial (non‐financial) low‐risk item, investors assess investment riskiness higher (lower) than when a KAM is unrelated to the low‐risk item. Our findings indicate the varying communicative value of KAMs across financial and non‐financial contexts.
Publisher: Informa UK Limited
Date: 20-04-2021
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 10-03-2021
DOI: 10.1111/ACFI.12771
Abstract: We examine whether the communication of combined assurance is effective in increasing favourable investment decisions towards a company with negative financial performance. We find that the communication of combined assurance, compared to when only corporate social responsibility (CSR) assurance is communicated, results in a more significant impact on investors’ decisions to invest when the company has negative performance, but this effect is less significant when the company has positive performance. When the company has positive performance, perceived reliability and willingness to invest do not change regardless of whether combined assurance is included or not.
Publisher: American Accounting Association
Date: 06-2018
DOI: 10.2308/AJPT-52175
Abstract: One of the challenges associated with emerging forms of external reporting is finding efficient and effective means to enhance the credibility of these reports (IAASB 2016). This study examines a novel credibility-enhancing mechanism, combined assurance (CA), where the credibility-enhancing processes of the internal auditor, the external auditor, and the effectiveness of risk management and internal controls and processes are publicly reported by the company (audit committee). We identify the most appropriate setting currently available (Integrated Reporting in South Africa) to examine whether there are benefits associated with communicating the details of CA within companies' integrated reports. We find that communicating the details of CA is beneficial in reducing both analysts' forecast errors and dispersion, and also in reducing the bid–ask spread for companies where the information environment is weaker. The implications of these findings for regulators, standard-setters, assurance providers, and users of extended external reports are discussed.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 03-02-2022
Abstract: We examine whether the benefits and consequences of building trust through corporate social responsibility (CSR) vary when the company engages in material or immaterial CSR, and the conditions under which these benefits hold. Our study informs companies about the relative benefits and consequences of engaging in particular types of CSR activities. Prior archival research finds that CSR performance can buffer companies against negative stock reactions caused by subsequent adverse events, such as financial restatements. However, theory suggests that there are boundary conditions for this buffering effect through the multiple dimensions of trust violations. We predict and find using Experiment 1 that positive performance in material CSR enhances competence trust, while positive performance in immaterial CSR enhances integrity trust in the company. We predict and find using Experiment 2 that positive material CSR performance alleviates investors' negative reactions to an error restatement but that this effect does not occur for a fraud restatement. In contrast, positive immaterial CSR performance results in greater negative reactions to a fraud restatement, but this effect does not occur for an error restatement. These effects can be explained through the multiple dimensions of trust and trust violation, in accordance with the schematic model of dispositional attribution. Lastly, a supplementary experiment supports the robustness of our results to the baseline of neutral CSR performance. Our study has important implications for companies and standard setters about the trust‐building effects of engagement in CSR and, more generally, of how CSR issues with different materiality levels buffer against the adverse effects of negative events.
No related grants have been discovered for Hien Hoang.