우리나라 企業會計基準上 一般原則의 含蓄的 意味에 관한 硏究-言語的 相對性假說에 의한 接近試圖-

• 영문명: A Study on the Connotative Meanings of Qualitative Characteristics of Accounting Information
• 발행기관: 인하대학교 산업경제연구소
• 저자명: 이성규(Sung-Kyu Lee)
• 간행물 정보: 『경상논집』연구논문집 제6집, 129~160쪽, 전체 32쪽
• 주제분류: 경제경영 > 경제학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 1992.08.01

영문 초록

This study is to identify whether there are differences in the connotiative meanings of qualitative charcteristics of accounting information among professional groups and user groups. The linguistic relativity hypothesis by Sapir(1956) and Whorf(1956) and its systemizaiton in accounting field indicate that meanings of accounting concepts affect the cognitive behaviors of accounting information users. Previous studies such as Haried(1972), Oliver(1974) and Houghton(1987) showed that accounting concepts affected the linguistic behaviors of different professional users and were understood differently by the users. In Korea, the qualitative characteristics of accounting information are codified in the accounting principles as the six basic concepts (reliability, objectivity, full disclosure, consistency, materiality and conservatism). The consensus on the meanings of those basic concepts were not reached yet and not tested empirically. This exploratory study is to examine whether there exists the consensus on the connotative meanings of those basic concepts among professional groups and users. For the purpose, this study selected 15 certified public accountants and 10 securities analysts and asked them to measure the meanings of the basic concepts in terms of 22 scales suggested by Haried(1972). The subjects were to tick one of seven spaces for each scale. The accountants were also asked to measure their perception of accounting information user's meanings of the basic concepts by same scales. The sets of responses were analyzed by groups and concepts. The factor structures of meaning were indentified by factor analysis and were compared among groups. The three factors were selected after varimax rotation and the 22 scales were assigned to the most heavily loaged factor. The semantic differentials associated with the three factors were classified in terms of three dimensions of Osgood et al(1957) as evaluative, potency and activity dimension. In the comparison of the factor structures of meanings between accountants and securities analysts, two groups were similar in relibaility, objectivity and materiality, while they were different in full disclosure, consistency and conservatism. The factor structures of securities analysts were characterized by small number of factors with high eigen values, especially in full disclousre, consistency and conservatism. The factor structures of accountants' perception of users' meanings were similar with those of securities analysts in reliability, full disclosure and materiality, while they were different in objectivity, consistency and conservatism. The factor strucures of accountants and accounant's perception were similar in reliability, consistency, materiality and conservatism, while they were different in objecivity and full disclosure. The semantic differntials associated with the three factors were compared among groups. The semantic differentials between accountants and securities analysts were different as the dimensions were easily identified for each factor in the group of accountants. As to the group of securities analysts, the dimensions could not be easily identified as all three dimensions were appeared in many factors of basic concepts. Also, the securities analysts depended on the evaluative dimension for the first factor in all of the basic concepts excepts for reliability and the evaluative were reappeared in the other factors. This result indicated that securities analysts understand the connotive meaning of the basic concepts on the basis of evaluative dimension. Interestingly enough, the semantic differencials of accountants' perception of user's meaning were similar to those of securities analysts as they also depended heavily on the evaluative demension and all three dimensions including evaluative dimension appeared in the other factors. These results can be affected by the following limitations of this study : 1) This study utilized 22 scales of Har

목차

Ⅰ. 문제의 제기

Ⅱ. 언어적 상대성가설과 기존연구

Ⅲ. 연구방법

Ⅳ. 자료의 분석

Ⅴ. 결론

별첨

Abstract