Bogging Down Investors: An Unintended Consequence of Litigation Risk
SSRN Electronic Journal, Page: 1-52
2025
- 1Citations
- 2,769Usage
- 8Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations1
- Citation Indexes1
- CrossRef1
- 1
- Usage2,769
- Abstract Views2,500
- 2,497
- Downloads269
- 263
- Captures8
- Readers8
- SSRN3
Article Description
Securities litigation risk is a well-recognized yet underexplored source of financial reporting complexity or unreadability. This study examines the effect of litigation risk on the readability of corporate financial reports. The 1999 Silicon Graphics Inc. (SGI) court ruling unexpectedly reduced litigation risk for firms within the Ninth Circuit Court’s jurisdiction. Using a difference-in-differences design centered on the SGI court ruling, we find that, while the readability of financial reports generally declines over the sample period, treated firms in the Ninth Circuit experience a comparatively smaller decline in readability than control firms in other states after the ruling. Put differently, treated firms experience a relative improvement in reporting readability following the ruling. This effect is concentrated among firms prone to securities litigation and those with greater external financing needs, but it is muted for firms engaging in earnings management. Furthermore, improved reporting readability among treated firms can be partially attributed to alleviated concerns about the adequacy of cautionary language, as evidenced by a significant decrease in negative forward-looking statements, particularly risk-related ones. Collectively, our findings suggest that securities litigation risk contributes to reduced readability in financial reporting.
Bibliographic Details
https://www.ssrn.com/abstract=3447040; http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3447040; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soa_research/2068; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3095&context=soa_research; https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3447040; https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3447040; https://ssrn.com/abstract=3447040
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know