[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
:: Volume 6, Issue 12 (3-2022) ::
َAAPC 2022, 6(12): 308-343 Back to browse issues page
The effect of managers' personality type on earnings management and its moderating role in the relationship between earnings management and corporate social responsibility disclosure
Ahmad Reza Shafaat1, Mohammad Kashanipour *2, Reza Gholami Jamkarani3, Hossein Jahangirnia4
1- PhD Student in Accounting, Qom Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qom, Iran. (Shafaat821@yahoo.com )
2- Associate professor, Tehran University,College of Farabi, Ghom, Iran, (corresponding author), , Kashanipour@ut.ac.ir
3- Assistant Professor of Accounting Department Ghom Branch, Islamic Azad University, ghom, Iran (Accountghom@gmail.com)
4- Assistant Professor of Accounting Department Ghom Branch, Islamic Azad University, ghom, Iran (Hosein_jahangirnia@yahoo.com)
Abstract:   (8607 Views)
  Managers' personality traits can influence corporate financial decisions and performance. On the other hand, earnings management and its relationship with corporate social responsibility disclosure are topics of interest to academics and financial statement users that may be influenced by the personality traits of managers. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of managers' personality type on earnings management and its role in the relationship between earnings management and corporate social responsibility. The research population included companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange during 2013-2018. In total, 149 firms were selected by systematic elimination method. We used the library method to collect a part of the data. In addition, managers’ personality type was assessed using Bortner’s questionnaire. The research data were analyzed by multiple regression test in Eviews software. The results show that the variable of managers' personality type has a positive and significant effect on earnings management, In addition, this variable has a significant positive effect on the disclosure of corporate social responsibility in interaction with the earnings management variable. According to the findings of the present study, managers with Type "A" personality in the years when the firm's earnings is managed are more likely to disclose their corporate social responsibility. The results of this research can have a positive impact on the development of internal literature on the subject of research as well as on the improvement of managerial, behavioral and investment decisions in the country.

Keywords: PersonalityType, Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure, Earnings Management, Hiding Earnings Management
Full-Text [PDF 322 kb]   (197 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2019/12/25 | Accepted: 2020/02/7 | Published: 2022/03/20
1. Adams, C.A. 2002. Internal Organisational Factors Influencing Corporate Social and Ethical Reporting: Beyond Current Theorising. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15 (2): 223–250.
2. Al-Tuwaijri, S.A., Christensen, T.E. and Hughes, K.E. II. 2004. The relations among environmental disclosure, environmental performance, and economic performance: a simultaneous equations approach. Accounting, Organizations and Society 29 (5-6): 447–471.
3. Almahrog, Y., Ali Aribi, Z. and Arun, T. 2018. Earnings management and corporate social responsibility: UK evidence. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting 16 (2): 311-332.
4. Bortner, R.W. 1969. A short rating scale as a potential measure of pattern A behavior. Journal of Chronic Diseases 22 (2): 87–91.
5. Breton, Gaetan and Stolowy, Hervé. 2000. A Framework for the Classification of Accounts Manipulations. HEC Accounting & Management Control Working Paper No. 708/2000. Available at: SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=263290 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.263290.
6. Buertey, S., Sun,E.J.,Lee, J.S., Hwang,J. 2020. Corporate social responsibility and earnings management: The moderating effect of corporate governance mechanisms. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 27 (1): 256-271
7. Chih, H. L., Shen, C. H., & Kang, F. C. 2008. Corporate social responsibility, investor protection, and earnings management: Some International evidence. Journal of Business Ethics 79 (1): 179–198.
8. Dayanandan, A., Donker, H. and Lin, K-Y. 2012. Ethical perceptions on earnings management. Behavioural Accounting and Finance 3 (3-4): 163–187.
9. Deegan, C. 2002. The Legitimizing Effect of Social an Environmental Disclosures–A Theoretical Foundation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 15 (3): 282–311
10. Franken, I.H.A and Muris, P. 2005. Individual differences in decision–making. Personality and Individual Differences 39 (5): 991–998.
11. Frei, R.L., Racicot, B. and Travagline, A. 1999. The impact of monochronic and type A behavior patterns on research productivity and stress. Journal of Managerial Psycholog 14 (5): 374–387.
12. Friedman, M. & Rosenman, R. H. 1974. Type A Behavior And Your Heart. New York: Knopf.
13. Heal, G. 2005. Corporate Social Responsibility: An Economic and Financial Framework. The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance – Issues and Practice 30(3): 387–409.
14. Healy, P. M., & Wahlen, J. M. 1999. A review of the earnings management literature and its implications for standard setting. Accounting Horizons 13: 365–383.
15. Hershey, G.L., & Lugo, J.O. 1970. Living psychology. Toronto: Macmillan.
16. Hughes, S.B., Anderson, A. and Golden, S. 2001. Corporate environmental disclosures: are they useful in determining environmental performance?. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 20: 217–240.
17. Jamal, M. 1990. Relationship of job stress and Type–A behaviour to employees’ job satisfaction, organizational commitment, psychosomatic health problems, and turnover motivation. Human Relations 45(8): 727–738.
18. Kellog, I., & Kellog, L.B. 1991. Fraud window dressing and negligence in financial statement. Colorado: McGrow Hill.
19. Martínez-Ferrero, J., Villarón-Peramato, Ó., García-Sánchez, I.M. 2017. Can Investors Identify Managerial Discretion in Corporate Social Responsibility Practices? The Moderate Role of Investor Protection. Australian Accounting Review 27(1): 1–13.
20. Mathews, M.R. 1993. Socially Responsible Accounting. Chapman Hall: Londan.
21. McShane, S.L. and Von Glinow, M.A. 2003. Organizational behavior (emerging realitie for the workplace revolution). 2nd ed: McGraw-Hill.
22. Mitchel, T.R. 1982. People in organization. 2nd ed. McGraw Hill: NewYork.
23. Nirwanto, Mirza.Zulaikha. Rahardja, H. 2011. Corporate social responsibility disclosure and its relation on institutional ownership: Evidence from public listed companies in Malaysia 2008-2010. Managerial Auditing Journal 13: 24–47.
24. Nyberg, A., Bernin , P. and Theorell,T. 2005. The Impact of leadership on the health of subordinates. Satsa- Joint Programme for working life research in Europe. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254202070_The_impact_of_leadership_on_the_health_of_subordinates.
25. Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. 2003. Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies 24: 403–441.
26. Ozsoy, Emrah. 2016. Conflict Management Styles and Type A Personality. Proceedings of the Fifth European Academic Research Conference on Global Business, Economics, Finance and Banking. Available at: http://www.globalbizresearch.org/Turky_Conference_2016_Dec/docs/doc/3.%20%20Management%20&%20Marketing/1612.pdf
27. Pagano, M., & Volpin, P. 2005. Managers, workers, and corporate control. The Journal of Finance 60 (2): 841–868.
28. Prior, D., Surroca, J., & Tribَo, J. A. 2008. Are socially responsible managers really ethical? exploring the relationship between earnings management and corporate social responsibility. Journal Compilation 16(3): 161–177.
29. Robbins. Stephan P. 2003. Essentials Of Organizational Behavior; 7th ed., San Diego State University: prentice Hall.
30. Saleh,M., Zulkifli,N., Muhamad, R. 2010. Corporate social responsibility disclosure and its relation on institutional ownership: Evidence from public listed companies in Malaysia. Managerial Auditing Journal 25(6): 591–613.
31. Samet, M. and Jarboui, A. 2017. CSR, agency costs and investment-cash flow sensitivity: a mediated moderation analysis. Managerial Finance 43(3): 299–312.
32. Schermerhorn, J.R., Hunt, J.G. and Osborn, R.N. 2005. Organizational behavior. 9th ed. Wiley International Edition.
33. Scott, W. R. 1997. Financial Accounting Theory. Scarborough: Prenting Hall.
34. Shafer, William E. and Wang, Zhihong. 2011. Effects of ethical context and Machiavellianism on attitudes toward earnings management in China. Managerial Auditing Journal 26(5): 372–392.
35. Shahriar M.S, Zaki K.A, Abdulquddoos.A. 2017. Personality type and accounting subfields. Academy of Accounting and Financial Studies Journal 21(1): 1–16.
36. Waddock, S. 2003. Stakeholder Performance Implications of Corporate Responsibility. International Journal of Business Performance management 5(2): 114–124.
Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:


XML   Persian Abstract   Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Shafaat A R, Kashanipour M, Gholami Jamkarani R, Jahangirnia H. The effect of managers' personality type on earnings management and its moderating role in the relationship between earnings management and corporate social responsibility disclosure. َAAPC. 2022; 6 (12) :308-343
URL: http://aapc.khu.ac.ir/article-1-773-en.html

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 6, Issue 12 (3-2022) Back to browse issues page
دوفصلنامه علمی حسابداری ارزشی و رفتاری journal of Value & Behavioral  Accounting
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.08 seconds with 30 queries by YEKTAWEB 4419