（2005）Firm-specific determinants of continuous corporate disclosures（Reply）.pdfVIP

The International Journal of Accounting 40 (2005) 285– 289 Reply Reply to discussant’s comments on bFirm specific determinants of continuous corporate disclosuresQ Roger Debreceny a, Asheq Rahman b,* a University of Hawaii, United States bNanyang Technological University, Singapore The points raised by the discussant with regards to our study are pertinent for the nature of research we have conducted. We addressed most of the discussants comments during the review process. We seem to have satisfied the discussant on several of the issues. However, some issues are contentious. Our discussion below addresses some of these concerns. The frequency and nature of the continuous forms of disclosure are new issues in the accounting and finance literature. Some of the concerns that the discussant raises will require future research to fully appreciate this phenomenon. We are confident that continuous disclosure will continue to be an important form of disclosure and the need for research on this class of disclosure will continue to grow. The discussant refers to Tables 5, 6 and 7 of the paper. She questions the robustness of our research model. In particular, she draws attention to the statistics in Table 5 and states that all but one test variable (information asymmetry) are not statistically significant in the models presented. We have carefully reexamined this concern. When these three tables are seen together, the short window models (Table 6) show up as more robust than the long window models. Intuitively this is an appropriate outcome as the phenomenon we are examining is continuous in nature, i.e., short term in nature. The long window frequency measures seem to c