We discuss the results of an investigation into the graphic reporting practices used by 240 leading UK companies in their 1989 corporate annual reports. Our main findings are that 79 per cent of companies used graphs and that 64 per cent of all graphs were bar/ column graphs. Many of these were poorly designed and constructed. There was evidence of biasing in graphic choices, with the use of graphic presentation being contingent upon 'good' rather than 'bad' financial performance. Companies were three times more likely to include graphs in their annual report which exaggerated, rather than understated, favourable time series trends in key performance variables. There was also evidence of the use of certain design and construction techniques intended to create a favourable visual impression. There is a need for more studies of graphic practices in other domains, and for guidelines to raise the standards and fidelity of financial graphs.
Cardoso, Ricardo Lopes, Rodrigo de Oliveira Leite & André Carlos Busanelli de Aquino
2018. The effect of cognitive reflection on the efficacy of impression management. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 31:6 ► pp. 1668 ff.
Cardoso, Ricardo Lopes, Rodrigo Oliveira Leite, André Carlos Busanelli de Aquino & Aurora García-Gallego
2016. A Graph is Worth a Thousand Words: How Overconfidence and Graphical Disclosure of Numerical Information Influence Financial Analysts Accuracy on Decision Making. PLOS ONE 11:8 ► pp. e0160443 ff.
Laidroo, Laivi & Nele Tamme
2016. Graphs in Annual Reports of Banks: Trustworthy or Not?. In Business Challenges in the Changing Economic Landscape - Vol. 1 [Eurasian Studies in Business and Economics, 2/1], ► pp. 147 ff.
Jones, Michael
2012. Impression Management. In Creative Accounting, Fraud and International Accounting Scandals, ► pp. 97 ff.
Ward, Mark
2010. The Ethic of Exigence. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 24:1 ► pp. 60 ff.
Sydserff, Robin & Pauline Weetman
2002. Developments in content analysis: a transitivity index and DICTION scores. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 15:4 ► pp. 523 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 august 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.