The Relationship Between Corporate Social Responsibility and Earnings Management In Terms of Accounting Information Quality

  • Uğur KayaEmail author
  • Ömer Yazan
Part of the Accounting, Finance, Sustainability, Governance & Fraud: Theory and Application book series (AFSGFTA)


Accounting applications have partial flexibilities to have the capability to adapt different conditions. This situation gives executives the ability to make it look like the business’ activity results are different than they actually are. Manipulations such as earnings management decrease the accounting information quality, which consequently causes users of financial statements to make deficient or erroneous decisions and this negatively affects an important portion of the society. Businesses claim that corporate social responsibility is a manifestation of transparent and accountable administrative practices. Therefore, an outcome of corporate social responsibility should be providing the public with reliable financial statements. In that case, it can be expected that assuming a corporate social responsibility based point view should in turn limit the manipulation of financial statements through the usage of earnings management applications, at least to a degree. Because of the fact that corporate social responsibility can be an inhibiting factor for earnings management, the quality of the information presented to the interest groups might also increase. This study aims to reveal the relationship between corporate social responsibility and earnings management according to accounting information quality.


Corporate social responsibility Earnings management Accounting information quality IAS/IFRS 


  1. Ajina A et al (2016) Guiding through the Fog: does annual report readability reveal earnings management? Res Int Bus Finan 38:509–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Banerjee SB (2007) Corporate social responsibility—the good, the bad and the ugly. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, CheltenhamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barth ME et al (2008) International accounting standards and accounting quality. J Acc Res 46(3):467–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beattie V et al (1994) Extraordinary items and income smoothing: a positive accounting approach. J Finan Acc 21(6):791–811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beaudoin CA (2008) Earnings management: the role of the agency problem and corporate social responsibility. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Drexel UniversityGoogle Scholar
  6. Biddle GC, Hilary G (2006) Accounting quality and firm-level capital investment. Acc Rev 81(5):963–982CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bowman EH (1973) Corporate social responsibility and the investor. Alfred P. Sloan School of Management Working Paper 641–73, Massachusetts Institute of Technology 50 Memorial Drive, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USAGoogle Scholar
  8. Bozzolan S et al (2015) Corporate social responsibility and earnings quality: international evidence. Int J Acc 50:361–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Callen JL et al (2012) Accounting quality, stock price delay, and future stock returns. Contemp Acc Res 30(1):269–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Can AV (2010) Accounting of the crisis and crisis of the accounting. Mali Çözüm Dergisi 97:21–47Google Scholar
  11. Carroll AB (1979) A three dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Acad Manag Rev 4(4):497–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chih H-L et al (2008) Corporate social responsibility, investor protection, and earnings management: some international evidence. J Bus Ethics 79:179–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Christensen HB et al (2015) Incentives or standards: what determines accounting quality change around IFRS adoption? Eur Acc Rev 24(1):31–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Crowther D, Aras G (2008) Corporate social responsibility. Ventus Publishing Aps, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Dechow PM, Skinner DJ (2000) Earnings management: reconciling the views of accounting academics, practitioners, and regulators. Acc Horiz 14(2):235–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Conceptual framework for financial reporting 2018, Accessed 3 Oct 2012
  17. Deloitte, IAS 8—Accounting policies, changes in accounting estimates and errors. Accessed 14 June 2017
  18. Deloitte, IAS 16—Property, plant and equipment. Accessed 17 Sept 2017
  19. Deloitte, IAS 23—Borrowing costs. Accessed 19 Dec 2017
  20. Deloitte, IAS 36—Impairment of assets. Accessed 12 Dec 2017
  21. Deloitte, IAS 38—Intangible assets. Accessed 3 Apr 2018
  22. Dimitropoulos PE et al (2013) The impact of IFRS on accounting quality. Adv Acc Incorp Adv Int Acc 29(1):108–123Google Scholar
  23. Ertan Y (2011) The effects of Turkish accounting standards on audit and accounting quality: an application. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Uludağ University Institute of Social SciencesGoogle Scholar
  24. Ewert R, Wagenhofer A (2005) Economic effects of tightening accounting standards to restrict earnings management. Acc Rev 80(4):1101–1124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fleming P, Jones MT (2013) The end of corporate social responsibility-crisis & critique. SAGE Publications Ltd., LondonGoogle Scholar
  26. Gargouri RM et al (2010) The relationship between corporate social performance and earnings management. Can J Adm Sci 27(4):320–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gras-Gil E et al (2016) Investigating the relationship between corporate social responsibility and earnings management: evidence from Spain. Bus Res Q, 51, 1–11, Accessed on 3 Sept 2017
  28. Gürol Y et al (2010) Concept of corporate social responsibility and a perspective on the issue in developing country context. Istanbul Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi 43:135–162Google Scholar
  29. Healy PM, Wahlen JM (1999) A review of the earnings management literature and its implications for standard setting. Acc Horiz 13(4):365–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Houqe MN et al (2014) Does mandatory IFRS adoption improve information quality in low investor protection countries? J Int Acc Audit Tax 23:87–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hribar P et al (2010) A new measure of accounting quality. Rev Acc Stud. Accessed 12 Mar 2015
  32. IAS 37, International Accounting Standard 37 Provisions, Contingent liabilities, and contingent assets. Accessed 18 Apr 2018
  33. Imhoff EA (1992) The relation between perceived accounting quality and economic characteristics of the firm. J Account Public Policy 11(2):97–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kaya U, Dinç E (2007) Evaluation of tangible assets according to Turkish accounting standards and their accounting transactions. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 16(2):343–364Google Scholar
  35. Khajavi S, Bayazidi A (2011) Investigating the relationship between Earnings Management and Corporate Social Responsibility of Accepted Companies in Tehran Stock Exchange. J Acc Adv 3(1)Google Scholar
  36. Kim Y et al (2012) Is earnings quality associated with corporate social responsibility? Acc Rev 87(3):761–796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kotler P, Lee N (2005) Corporate social responsibility-doing the best for your company and your cause. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  38. Lin S et al (2012) Does accounting quality change following a switch from U.S. GAAP to IFRS? Evidence from Germany. J Account Public Policy 31(6):641–657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. McDermott KE (2012) Financial reporting quality and investment in corporate social responsibility. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Kenan-Flagler School of Business, University of North CarolinaGoogle Scholar
  40. McNichols MF, Stubben SR (2008) Does earnings management affect firms’ investment decisions? Acc Rev 83(6):1571–1603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mulford CW, Comiskey EE (2002) The financial numbers game, detecting creative accounting practices. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  42. Pounder B (2013) Measuring accounting quality. Strateg Finan 95(5):18–20Google Scholar
  43. Prior D et al (2008) Are socially responsible managers ethical? Exploring the relationship between corporate social responsibility and earnings management. Corp Gov 16(3):160–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Scholtens B, Kang F-C (2012) Corporate social responsibility and earnings management: evidence from Asian economies. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 20:95–112. Scholar
  45. Schwartz MS, Carroll AB (2003) Corporate social responsibility: a three-domain approach. Bus Ethics Q 13(4):503–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Scott W (1997) Financial accounting theory. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  47. Sellhorn T, Gornik-Tomaszewski S (2006) Implications of the “IAS Regulation” for research into the international differences in accounting systems. Acc Europe 3:187–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Stolowy H, Breton G (2000a) A framework for the classification of accounts manipülations. HEC Accounting & Management Control Working Paper No. 708/2000. 18 Dec 2014
  49. Stolowy H, Breton G (2000b) A review of research on accounts manipulation. In: 23rd Annual Congress of the European Accounting Association. 19 Dec 2014
  50. Tendeloo BV, Vanstraelen A (2005) Earnings management under German GAAP versus IFRS. Eur Acc Rev 14(1):155–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tilt CA (2009) Corporate responsibility, accounting and accountants. In: Idowu SO, Leal Filho W (ed) Professionals’ perspectives of corporate social responsibility. Springer, Berlin, pp 11–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Topbaş N (2009) Finansal Kriz Ortamında Bankaların Muhasebe Sistemlerinde Gerçeğe Uygun Değerleme Yönteminin Etkileri. Bankacılık Dergisi 68:56–64Google Scholar
  53. Van Het Hof SD (2009) Türkiye’de Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk Üçgeni: Şirketler, Toplum ve Toplum Kuruluşları. TÜBİTAK Project, Project Nr: 107K182Google Scholar
  54. Verdi RS (2006) Financial reporting quality and investment management. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Working Paper. Accessed 20 Feb 2015
  55. Yip E et al (2011) Corporate social responsibility reporting and earnings management: the role of political costs. Australas Acc Bus Finan J 5(3):17–33Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Economics and Administrative SciencesKaradeniz Technical UniversityTrabzonTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Economics and Administrative SciencesAksaray UniversityAksarayTurkey

Personalised recommendations