实证会计研究:“相关”抑或“因果”?

Positive Accounting Research:“Correlation”or“Causality”?

实证会计研究存在“重相关而轻因果”的趋势。本文基于社会(自然)科学的典型例子概括了“相关”与“因果”的区别,并以“会计信息披露管制”、“‘深口袋’理论、集团诉讼与审计责任”和“财务报告的目标”为例,揭示了当代会计理论发展中“重相关轻因果”的趋势。随后,本文从“主题固化与知识传递路径”、“迷失在‘大数据的丛林’里”和“会计学科知识储备”等角度深刻剖析了实证会计研究中“相关”崛起与“因果”式微的原因,并通过翔实的事例与实证研究的例子阐述了探求“因果关系”的步骤—从相关、干预到反事实推理。在此基础上本文通过理论分析—确定研究问题、选择解释变量、阐述学术贡献,勾勒解释变量与被解释变量之间的因果关系,实证分析—包括样本选择,过度追求统计显著的“星战”,选择性报告结果与可重复性“危机”,遗漏主要解释变量,内生性控制的Heckman、PSM、DID、RDD、公司层面的固定效应等方法,旨在详细阐述如何进行因果辨识。本文还勾勒了基于正式制度与非正式制度的分析框架,倡导通过“正式制度与非正式制度融合”强化“因果关系”辨识。最后本文提出了针对性的建议。

Based on typical examples of social(natural)science,this paper summarizes the differences between“correlation”and“causality”,and then takes“accounting information disclosure regulation”,“deep pocket theory,class action lawsuits and audit responsibility”and“the objective of financial reporting”as three examples to reveal the tendency of“emphasizing correlation over causality”in contemporary accounting theory.Furthermore,from the perspectives of“theme solidification and knowledge transmission path”,“the lost in the jungle of big data”and“accounting discipline knowledge reserve”,this paper deeply analyzes the reasons for the rise of“correlation”and the decline of“causality”in positive accounting research,and further expounds the steps of exploring“causality”through detailed cases and empirical research examples—from correlation,intervention to counterfactual reasoning.On this basis,this paper outlines the causality between explanatory and dependent variables through theoretical analysis(sleeting research topics,choosing explanatory variables,and identifying academic contributions),empirical analysis including sample selection,excessive pursuit of statistically significant“star wars”,selective reporting results,and repeatability“crisis”,the omission of main explanatory variables,and the approaches of mitigating endogeneity such as Heckman’s two-stage regression,propensity score matching method,difference-in-difference method,regression discontinuity design and firm-level fixed effect,with the purpose of explaining how to make causal identification.This paper also outlines an analytical framework on the basis of formal and informal institutions,and advocates strengthening the identification of“causality”through“the integration of formal and informal institutions”.Finally,this paper puts forward several suggestions.