ANALYSIS THE FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE EARNINGS RESPONSE COEFFICIENT (ERC) IN THE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LISTED IN INDONESIA STOCK

EXCHANGE Rekyan Shinta Hapsari Airlangga Univesity Surabaya Email: rekyanshinta@gmail.com

Abstract This research is aimed to analyze the factors that influence Earnings Response Coefficient (ERC) in the manufacturing company listed in Indonesia Stock Exchange. This research used seven factors which are firm size, beta risk, earnings persistence, growth opportunities, capital structure, board composition and audit quality. It based on the different market response toward earnings information of some companies over the others. The sample of this research is 132 companies selected by using purposive sampling method. This research tested the hypotheses by using multiple regression analysis models. The result of this research found that firm size gives no significant influence because it also used as the proxy for other firm characteristics. Beta risk gives negative significant influence toward ERC because higher beta risk will increase the portfolio risk. Earnings persistence gives no significant influence toward ERC because the investors less response the persistence in earnings change and consider the others information to make investment decision. Growth opportunities give positive significant influence toward ERC because it indicate other success in future project and easy to attract capital. Capital structure gives negative significant influence toward ERC because the good news in high leverage company will give benefit to the debtholders over the stockholders. Board composition gives negative significant influence toward ERC because the investors doubt about the ability of independent directors in monitoring the management and decrease the financial statement fraud. The audit quality gives no

significant influence toward ERC because the investors only concern to the amount earnings number rather than the accuracy of the earnings. Keywords: Earnings Response Coefficient (ERC), firm size, beta risk, earnings persistence, growth opportunities, capital structure, board composition, audit quality.

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background Financial statements contain information that will be response by the investors as consideration for decision making. Information which is responses by the investors has quality of value relevant which is capable to make different in decision. The investors response toward earnings information will be different for some company over the others company. Then it leads to the study called earnings response coefficient (ERC) which is identify and explain the different market response toward earnings information. Traditional empirical research by Ball and Brown

(1968) measured the information content of earnings by classifying the reported earnings into good news (GN) if greater than the market expectation and bad news (BN) if less than expectation. to the to They found that stock in news of return response market quite. Then information bad news of the content good financial is really

statements. Lev (1989) in Scott (2009:196) found that the response It this means and most led variability studies security value

return due to factors other than the change in earnings. finding to the called relevant of financial information. The value relevance theory then led to the next

important direction of Ball and Browns study called as earnings response coefficient (ERC) theory. For a given

amount Earnings

of

unexpected response

earnings,

the (ERC)

security

market and

response will greater for some company than the others. coefficient explained identified the difference market response toward earnings information. There were many researchers that analyze the factors that caused the different in market response by using earnings Kothari, response 1989), coefficient and growth (ERC), 1987 such and as Earnings and and Persistency (Kormendi Lipe, Collins

opportunities

(Collins

Kothari, 1989); beta risk (Collins and Kothari, 1989; Chambers et al., 2005 and Dhaliwal and Reynolds, 1994), capital structure (Dhaliwal et al., 1991), firm size (Chaney and Jeter, 1991), auditor quality (Teoh and Wong, 1993), board composition (Petra, 2005), industry effect (Biddle and Seow, 1991), timeliness (Jaswadi, 2004), accounting method (Chandrarin, 2003). The motivations of other of this paper other referred than to the in

possibility

factors

change

earnings that can cause different market response toward earnings information. This paper will combine the factors that used in previous research which are firm size, beta risk, earning persistence, growth opportunities, capital structure, and audit quality. Second motivation is expand the previous research by analyzing one of corporate governance mechanism which is board composition, since the corporate governance became crucial issue relating the responsibility of management in providing financial

information.

The

third result

motivation in

is

relating earnings

to

the

inconsistencies

previous

response

coefficient research such as firm size (Easton Zmijewsky, 1989; Chaney and Jeter, 2005; Collins and Khotari, 1989) and earnings persistence (Kormedi and Lipe, 1987; Ali Zarowin, 1992). This different of ERC research from previous ERC research is that the ERC research expands the previous research by using value relevant method which is extent the observation period. Based on value relevant theory, the timeliness is not the main issue. The research still examine the relation between stock price and accounting information, but the research identify the drivers of value that may be reflected in price over a longer time period (Beaver, 2002). This research will analyze the influence of each independent persistence, board the which are and firm audit size, beta risk, earning growth opportunities, capital toward structure, dependent Stock

composition manufacturing

quality in

variable which is earnings response coefficient (ERC) in company listed Indonesia Exchange (IDX) through multiple regression analysis by using Eviews 4.0.

1.2

Problem Statement

According factors that

to

the

research earnings

background response

elaborated coefficient

above, the problem of this research is relating to the influence (ERC) and how far those factors give influence to ERC. The problem statement in this research is: Do firm size, beta risk, earnings persistence, growth opportunities, capital structure, board composition and audit quality influence earnings response coefficient (ERC)?

1.3 The

Research Contributions contributions for the of this research and consist policy. relating of This the

contribution that support

theory,

empirical of

research hopefully can enrich the concept and theories development science research of the earnings response coefficient and the factors that influence it. The empirical contribution of this research is to give direction for the management and accountant information result evaluate of to as this improve the usefulness for decision of financial The and the statements information so that the investors can use the consideration research the making. contribution of this research to the policy making is the can give that consideration can improve feedback for the standard setters of accounting policy to and make standard usefulness of financial statements.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT 2.1 Value Relevant Theory SFAC 2 defines value relevance as the information that can help the users of financial statement to form their concept own of predictions value earnings of event. is According it uses to Scott to the (2009:196) relevance closely since related

quality,

security

market reaction to measure the extent to which financial statements information assist investors to predict future performance possibility of for the company. factors That theory than opens change the in other other

earnings to influence market response. The focus of value relevant study is the variable that asses the valuation characteristics of particular accounting amount. In the other hand it was assess about how well the accounting number reflect the information used by investors in valuing the economics performance of the company. Beaver of (2002) explained two major that characteristics value relevance research

distinguish from other capital market research. The first is that, value relevance research demands an in-depth knowledge standards, numbers of and accounting the specific the other than is institutions, features research is that in of area. value accounting the reported A second of

more

distinguishing information

characteristic the main

timeliness

issue

relevance

research. Value relevance research still includes studies

examine the relation between the level of stock price and accounting data, but its not encompasses in event study. In contrast to event study, value relevance studies identify the drivers of value that may be reflected in price over a longer time period than assumed in event study.

2.2 Earnings Response Coefficient Theory Earnings Response coefficient (ERC) is the reaction of earnings that announced by the company. Collins and Kothari (1989) defined earnings response coefficient as, The price change including by one-dollar stock to current earnings and is equal to one plus the present value of the revisions in expected future earnings caused by this stock.. ERC is one important direction from the research by Ball and Brown (1968) that can identify and explain the different market response toward earnings information. The When the principal annual of ERC is that the investors if the have

expectation before the company announced their earnings. earnings announced, actual earnings higher than the investors expectation it become good news (GN), so the investors will revise upward their expectation toward earnings and performance of the company and decide to buy the stock of the company. The opposite, if the expectation is higher than the actual earnings, it becomes bad news (BN), so the investor will

revise

downward of

their the

expectation and

toward

earnings to sell

and

performance

company

decides

their

stock. The increasing and decreasing of the stock price will accumulate in the cumulative abnormal return (CAR) for each company. Expectation of future earnings can be based on information of the of current earnings, on the but the accuracy behavior. 2.3 Determinant of Earnings Response Coefficient and prediction depends earnings

Hypotheses Development For a given amount of unexpected net income, the extent of security price or abnormal return depends on some factors; those factors are called as determinant of ERC. Those factors can influence the magnitude of ERC. The determinants of ERC that will be reviewed in this research are firm size, beta risk, earnings persistence, growth opportunities, capital structure, board composition and audit quality.

2.3.1Firm size Firm size in ERC research is used as a proxy for the informativeness Research found because relating by the that firm big of stock (1985) is company price in (Scoot, and much so related 2009:158). Jeter (2005) ERC the with when Atiase Chaney

size

negatively disclosed the

information

earnings

throughout

year,

earnings announcement release the information become less informative for investor. Research by Mulyani et al. (2007) and Easton and Zmijewski (1989) found that firm size is not significant variable in explaining earnings response coefficient. The reason is probably, the size of the firm also used as the proxy for others characteristics of the company, such as profitability, risk and growth. Different result found by Chaney and Jeter (2005) and Susilawati (2008). They found that firm size is positively related with the magnitude of Earnings response coefficient. Larger the size of the firm, the ability to generate future return trough its subdivision will be higher. Good news for larger company size, the investors will respond by buying the stock of the company. Higher demand of company stock implies higher increase in market price and shares return in response to the GN, hence, a higher ERC. H1: firm size of the company has positive influence

toward ERC
2.3.2

Beta risk Every company has systematic risk which is risk that

influences risk-averse, expected portfolio.

large

number

of

assets will risk company

and

cannot

be the of

diversified. Assumed that the investors are typical of rational and beta investors the of the increase of return will value decrease

Higher

increase

portfolio risk, consequently the investor would not buy

as

much

more

as

if

the

security

was

has

low

beta,

although the company has good news. The demand of GN company stock will be lower for the higher beta, other things equal. Lower demand implies lower increase in market price and stock return in response to GN, hence, lower ERC. The low-risk previous companies. researches Research by Collins by and Kothari and

(1989) found that high-risk companies have lower ERC than results Dhaliwal Reynold (1994), Willing (1999), and Mulyani et al. (2007) also found that beta risk is negatively related with the earnings response coefficient (ERC). H2: Beta risk of the company has negative influence

toward ERC
2.3.3

Earnings persistence The earnings persistency can be The seen from the would

earnings innovation in current year related to the stock price changing (Scott, 2009:155). investor expect the companies that have steady changes from year to year. Study by Kormedi and Lipe (1987) and Mulyani et al. (2007) found that earnings persistence has positively influence the earnings response coefficient. Different with Ali and Zarowin (1992) found that ERC has negative correlation the earnings persistence. Earnings company to persistence the explains the ability earn in of the

persist

earnings

that

current

period until next period. Steady GN of a company, the investors will react by buying the stock of the company. Higher demand of the company stock implies higher increase in market price and stock return in response to the GN, hence, higher ERC. H3: earnings persistence of the company has positive

influence toward ERC

2.3.4

Growth opportunities The company with higher opportunity to growth will

have more ability to generate earnings and increase the earnings 2009:158). Mulyani Growth et in the to Study al. future in found include by because the and they Kothari have bigger (Scoot, and has or opportunity invest (2007) next period

Collins

(1989)

growth

opportunities project

positively influence the earnings response coefficient. opportunities existing opportunities to invest in project that are expected to yield rates of return that exceed the risk adjusted rate of return. High investment opportunities make company can increase the value of the company. Such company can easily attract capital and additional sources of growth. Thus the stock demand of GN company stock will be higher for growth company. Higher demand implies higher increase in market price and stock return in response to GN in response to GN, hence, higher ERC.

H4:

growth

opportunities

of

the

company

has

positive

influence toward ERC

2.3.5

Capital structure Capital structure is defined as that mix of debt,

preferred, and common equity that causes its stock price to be maximized. In this research, capital structure is proxy by leverage. Leverage refers to the extent to which a firm relies on debt (Ross et al., 2008:553). Study by Dhaliwal et al. (1991) and Mulyani et al. (2007) found that capital structure that proxied by leverage has negatively influence with earnings response coefficient. The company which have higher leverage will have lower earnings response coefficient. The good news of highly leverage company will adds strength and safety to bonds and other outstanding debt. As much as the GN of highly leveraged company, the earnings will goes to debtholders rather than shareholders. H5: Leverage level of the company has negative influence to ERC 2.3.6 Board composition Board directors composition on the deals with the proportion of of

independent directors compare with the total number of board. Higher number independent board of directors hypothesized to increase the integrity of financial information by limiting managements ability to manipulate earnings. Independent directors are seen as

a mean for monitoring management and for ensuring that management decision are aligned with the best interest of the from shareholders. relationships Independent with could the which directors companies interfere have are with no free their contractual relationships

capacity to act in an independent manner. The demand of the GN company stock will be higher for the company that has higher proportion of independent board of directors. Higher demands of stock imply higher market price and stock return response to the GN, hence, higher ERC. of Study by Petra (2005) resulted has that proportion independent directors positive

influence to earnings informativeness. H6: Boards composition positive influence toward ERC
2.3.6

Audit quality Auditor function is as a party that gives assurance

toward the accounting number and assurance the fairness of accounting number in financial statement. Higher quality of audit that proxied by size of audit firm will increase the accuracy of financial statement. The reason is that the big-four audit firm will give the best effort to audit the financial statement of the company in order to defense by their Teoh reputation. and Wong The previous resulted research the audit conduct (1993)

quality has positive relation with the earnings response coefficient.

H7: Audit quality has positive influence toward ERC 3 RESEARCH DESIGN

3.1 Data and Sample of Research The type of data that used in this research is and this

secondary data that obtain from Indonesia stock exchange (www.idx.com), Central Data University Indonesia of Business Capital and Data Market that Directory of used in Economics Gajahmada

(www.pdbe.com).

research is consists of: 1. Financial statement of the manufacturing company for year 2004-2008 2. The company profile of the manufacturing company in year 2008 3. Stock exchange trading that consists of daily

abnormal return, closing price and beta correction for year 2004-2008. The population that of this in research is manufacturing is purposive

company that listed in Indonesia stock exchange. Sampling technique used this research sampling technique that draws the sample according to certain criteria as follows: 1. Manufacturing 2008. company in Indonesia stock exchange

that reports their financial statement for year 2004

2. The

information

about

companys

daily

abnormal

returns is available continuously in year 2004-2008. 3. The financial statements are representing in Rupiah. 4. The company profiles are available in Indonesia Stock Exchange website. The sample of this research is consists 132

manufacturing company listed in Indonesia Stock exchange. The sample selection procedure is depicted in table 1.

3.3

Operational Definition and Variable Measurement. Operational definition and variable measurement of the

variables can be seen in table 2.

3.4 Data Technique Analysis This research is attempted to analyze the factors that influence earnings as response the coefficient by using This this regression and analyze analysis the research The conducted. in

research is using Eviews4.0 software to process the data hypothesis. hypotheses research are tested by the following regression.
....(11)

ERCit : Earnings response coefficient company i period t SIZEit: Firm size of company i in period t

BETAit: Beta risk of company i in period t PERSit: Earnings persistence of company i in period t GRTHit: Earnings growth of company i in period t LEVit : Capital structure of company i in period t BRDCit: Percentage of independent board of directors of company i in period t AUDQit: Audit quality of company i in period t

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Statistics Descriptive The size, dependent while beta variable the is the earnings variables response are firm growth

coefficient,

independent earnings

risk,

persistence,

opportunities, capital structure, board composition and audit quality. The statistic descriptive is depicted in table 4.1.

4.2 Classical Assumption Testing The test for the factors that influence earnings response analysis in the coefficient models. multiple It (ERC) needs used to multiple the regression relationship in order to know

between the dependent variable and independent variable linear regression models achieve the best linear unbiased estimator (BLUE). The relationship between dependent variable and independent

variable classic

is

tested

by tests

classic consist

assumption of

test. test

The test, and

assumption

normality

autocorrelation

test,

heteroscedasticity

multicolinearity test. The normality is tested by using Histogram Normality test, autocorrelation is tested by using Breusch-Godfrey method (Widarjono, 2009:147), heteroscedasticity is tested by using White method (Widarjono, 2009:128) and the multicolinearity is tested by analyze the correlation matrix of independent variables (Ghozali, 2001:95).

4.3 Hypotheses Testing The factors that analyze in this research are firm size, beta risk, earnings persistence, growth opportunities, capital structure, board composition, and audit quality. Table 4 will present the test result of the factors that influence earnings response coefficient. This research used seven variables as the factors that growth variables structure influence influence earnings response capital quality. growth From coefficient. structure, the have result Those board test, capital Firm factors are firm size, beta risk, earning persistence, opportunities, and and toward audit board of beta risk, composition

opportunities,

composition response

significant

earnings

coefficient.

size, earnings persistence, and audit quality gives no

significant follows: 4.4 DISCUSSION 4.4.1 Firm size

influence

toward

earnings

response

coefficient. The detail explanation will be discussed as

The result of this research found that firm size has no the significant ERC higher. influence This toward earnings the response previous coefficient. Larger the size of the company does not make finding supported research by Easton and Zmijewski (1989) and contrary with the research by Chaney and Jeter (2005) and Mulyani et al. (2007) that found significant influence of firm size toward ERC. Scoot (2009:153) used the firm size as the proxy for the informativeness of earnings. The firm size has no significant influence toward ERC probably because the firm size also used as the proxy for others firm characteristics, Zmijewski, 1989). such as growth and risk (Easton and

4.4.2 Beta risk This research found that beta risk has negative response (ERC). This

significant cause lower

influence earnings

toward

earnings

coefficient (ERC). It means that higher beta risk will response coefficient finding supported the previous research by Collins and Kothari (1989), Dhaliwal and Reynold (1994) and Mulyani

et al. (2007). This finding gives evidence that market will response negatively to the company that has higher beta risk. Higher beta of the company will increase portfolio risk, consequently the investors will not buy the stock as much as the company that have lower beta.

4.4.3 Earnings persistence This research found that earnings persistence have no significant influence toward earnings response coefficient. It means that earnings persistence does not influence the earnings response coefficient. This finding supported the previous research by Harahap (2004) and contrary with the research by Collins and Kothari (1989) and Mulyani et al. (2007) that found significant influence of earnings persistence toward ERC. This response This result the gives evidence earnings making that investors although decision, less the the

information that in

change

company can persist the earnings for the future period. indicated economic investors not only considered the earnings information, but they also use others information to support their economic decision 4.4.4 Growth opportunities This research found that growth opportunities have positive influence toward earnings response. This finding supported pervious research by Collins and Khotari

(1989), Mulyani et al. (2007). The positive influence of growth opportunities implied that the investors will response more to the earnings information that released by the company that have higher opportunities to growth than non-growth and company. as Company growth that success will in the to project labeled company easily

attract capital for additional sources of growth. Growth because of investing in projects that yield above normal rates of return in generally referred to as economic growth.

4.4.5 Capital structure In this research, leverage has negative influence toward earnings response coefficient. It means the higher leverage level, the earnings response coefficient (ERC) will be lower. This finding support the previous research by Dhaliwal et al. (1991), Billings (1999), Setiati (2004), Mulyani et al. (2007). Leverage ratio reflect the amount of debt that used by the company to fund the business activities. The reaction of stock prices to unexpected earnings will be affected by liability risk. This is because the liability risk that determined due and to the mechanism for allocating among of the ratio wealth change unexpected earnings

stockholders

debtholders.

High

leverage

indicates that the source of fund is dominated by the debt over the equity. Much of the good news in earnings

goes

to

debtholders

rather

than

stockholders

(Scoot,

2009:154).

4.4.6 Board composition Board composition in this research was proxied by the proportion of independent directors that served in the board of directors. The result is the board compositions have negative significant influence toward earnings response coefficient. This finding is contrary with the previous research by Petra (2005) and Ahmed et al. (2006) that found no significant influence of board composition toward ERC. Independent directors limited in the involvement of company companys makes the activities business market and day-to-day 2006). whether operation This the of the (Ahmed, doubtful characteristic independent

directors are able to provide any significant business advice to increase the performance of the company. 4.4.7 Audit quality In this research Audit quality has no significant influence toward earnings response coefficient. This finding supported the previous research by Mulyani et al. (2007) and Riyatno (2007). This result gives finding that the quality of the audit did not influence the investors response toward earnings announcement. The investors only concern about the earnings reported in the financial

statement without pay attention to the accuracy of the earnings (Mulyani et al., 2007).

CONCLUSION, LIMITATIONS, SUGGESTIONS and IMPLICATIONS

The result of this research find that beta risk, growth response opportunities, give and coefficient audit capital while quality structure, firm have and board earning composition persistence, significant influence toward size, no earnings

significant

influence toward earnings response coefficient. The limitations of this research are the variables in this research have more than one measurement and this research did not consider the economic event that can caused strong response from the market such as merger. Based on the limitation, this research suggests for the next researchers to use others measurement of variables and adding the economic event to the model to be analyzed. The implication of this research are the management and accountant profession can increase the quality and credibility of financial statement so that the investors can make investment decision more accurately by using those information.

REFERENCES
Ahmed, K., M. Hossain, and M.B. Adams. 2006. The Effect of Board Composition and Board Size on the Informativeness of Annual Accounting Earnings. Corporate Governance Journal 14, No.5 : 418-431. Ali, A. Dan P. Zarowin, 1992, Permanent vs. Transitory Components of Annual Earnings and Estimation Error in Earning Response Coefficients. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 15, 249-64 Ball, R. dan P. Brown. 1968. An Empirical Evaluation of Accounting Income Numbers. Journal of Accounting Research 6 (Autumn). Beaver, W.H. 2002. Perspectives on Recent Capital Market Research. The Accounting Review. Vol 77 No 2 (April): 453-474 Billings, Bruce K. 1999. Revisiting the Relation between the Default Risk of Debt and the Earnings Response Coefficient. The Accounting Review. Vol. 74 No. 4. October (p. 509522) Bungin, B. 2001. Metodologu Penelitian Sosial: Formatformat Kuantitative dan Kualitaive. Airlangga Univercity Press: Surabaya.

Chandrarin, G., 2003. The Impact of Accounting Methods of Translation Gains (Losses) on the Earnings Response Coefficients. Proceeding Articles on SNA 5, 24-35. Chaney, P.K. dan D.C. Jeter, 1991, The Effect of Size on the Magnitude of Long Window Earnings Response Coefficients", Contemporary Accounting Research. Vol 8 No.2 : 540-560. Collin, D.W. dan S.P. Khotari. 1989. An Analysis of Intertemporal and Cross Sectional Determinants of Earnings Response Coefficients. Journal of Accounting and Economics. Vo. 11 (p. 143181) Dhaliwal, D.S, K.J. Lee dan S.S. Reynolds, 1994, The Effect of the Default Risk of Debt on the Earnings Response Coefficients, The Accounting Review 69, No. 2 (April): 412-419. Dhaliwal, D.S., K.J. Lee dan N.L. Farger, 1991, The assosiation between Unexpected Earnings and Abnormal Security Returns in the Presence of Financial Leverage, Contemporary Accounting Research 8, No. 1: 20-41. Donnely, R. 2002. Earnings Persisrence, Losses and The estimation of Earnings Response Coefficient. ABACUS. Vol. 38 No.1. Easton, P.D. dan M. Zmijewski. 1989. Cross-sectional Variation in the Stock Market Response to Accounting Earnings Announcements. Journal of Accounting and Economics 11:117-141. El-Mahdy, D.F. and A.A. Abdou. 2007. Trends of the Return- Earnings Association Over the Last Three Decades. Journal of Focus on Finance and Accounting Research. 117-145. Esme, F. 2007. Proffesional. All About Stock, 3E. McGraw-Hill

Eugene, F.B. and M.C. Ehrhardt. 2008. Financial Management: Theory and Practice. Cengage Learning. Financial Accounting Standard Board. 1996/97. Statements of Financial Accounting Concepts: Accounting Standards. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York. Freeman, R., and S. Tse. 1992. An Earnings Prediction Approach to examining intercompany Information Transfer. Journal of Accounting and Economics. Vol 15 (p: 509-523). Ghozali, I., (2001), Aplikasi Analisis Multivariat: dengan Program SPSS, Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang. Godfrey, J et al. 2010. Accounting Theory. 7th Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Australia. Gujarati, D., 1995,Basic Grawhill, New York. Econometrics, 3th Ed., Mc-

Harahap, K., 2004. Asosiasi Antara Praktik Perataan Laba Dengan Koefisien Respon Laba. Makalah. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi VII. Bali: 1-14. Hebert, B.M. 2007. Investment: an introduction. Chengage Learning. Ikatan Akuntan Indonesia. 2004. Keuangan. Salemba Empat, Jakarta Standar Akuntansi

Jaswadi. 2004. Dampak Earnings Reporting Lags terhadap Koefisien Respon Laba. Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Indonesia. Vol 8, No.3 : 295-315 Kam. V. 1990. Accounting Theory. 2th Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Canada Kieso, D.E., J.J. Weygandt, dan T.D. Warfield, 2007. Intermediate Accounting. 12th Edition, FASB Update. John Wiley & Sons, Inc

Kormendi, R dan R. Lipe, 1987, Earnings Innovations, Earnings Persistance, and Stock Return, Journal of Business 60:323-345. Lev, dan P. Zarowin. 1999. The Boundaries of Financial Reporting and How To Extend Them. Journal of Accounting Research 37: 353-385. Mike, W.P. 2008. Global Business. Cengage Learning. Mulyani, S., N.F. Asyik, and Andayani. 2007.Faktor-faktor yang Mempengaruhi Earnings Response Coefficient pada Perusahaan yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Jakarta. JAAI 11, No. 1 : 35-45. Murwaningsari, E. 2008. Pengujian Simultan: Faktor yang mempengaruhi Earnings Coefficient (ERC). Doctoral Thesis. University. Beberapa Response Trisakti

Naimah, Z. dan U. Sidharta. 2006. Pengaruh Ukuran Perusahaan, Pertumbuhan, dan Profitabilitas Perusahaan Terhadap Koefisien Respon Laba dan Koefisien Respon Nilai Buku Ekuitas: Studi Pada Perusahaan Manufaktur Di Bursa Efek Jakarta. Makalah. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi 9 Padang. K-AKPM 12: 126. Palupi, M. J. 2006. Analisis Faktor-faktor yang Mempengaruhi Koefisien Respon Laba: Bukti Empiris pada Bursa Efek Jakarta. Jurnal EKUBANK. Vol 3. Panikkos, P., K. Smyrnios and Sabine, K. 2006. Handbook of Research on Family Business. Edward Elgar Publishing. Riduwan, A. 2004. Pengaruh Alokasi antar perioda Berdasarkan PSAK No.46 terhadap Koefisien Respon Laba Akuntansi. Journal Simposium Nasional Akuntansi VII. Denpasar.

Riyatno. 2007. Pengaruh Ukuran Kantor Akuntan terhadap Earnings Response Coefficients. Keuangan dan Bisnis 5, No.2 : 148-162.

Oublik Jurnal

Ross, S.A., R.W. Westerfield and B.D. Jordan. 2008. Corporate Financial Fundamenta. Eight Edition. McGraw-Hill: America. Sawyer, M.C. 1985. The economics of Industry and Firm. Routledge. Scott, William R. 2009. Financial Accounting Theory, fifth edition. Prentice Hall Canada Inc. Scarborough, Ontario. Sekaran, Uma. (2003). Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach, 4th Ed. New York : John Wiley & Sons. Steven, T.P. 2006. The Effect of corporate governance on the informativeness of earnings. Journal of Economics and Governance 8:129-152 Susilawati, C.D. 2008. Faktor-faktor penentu ERC. Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi 7, No.2 : 146-161. Teets, W.R. dan C.E. Wasley. 1996. Estimating Earning Response Coefficients: Pooled versus Firm Specific Models. Journal of Accounting and Economics. 21, 279295 Teoh, S.H., and T.J., Wong. 1993. Perceived Auditor Quality and Earning Response Coefficients. The Accounting Review. 68, April: 346-366 Vishnani, S. and B.K. Shah. 2008. Value Relevance of Published Financial Statement with Special Emphasis on Impact of Cash Flow Reporting. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics. (p: 84-90) Wallison, P.J. 2006. All the Rage: Will Independent Directors Produce Good Corporate Governance?American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.www.aei.org.

Widarjono. A. 2005. Ekonometrika: Teori dan Aplikasi Untuk Ekonomi dan Bisnis. Penerbit Ekonesia. Fakultas Ekonomi UII. Yograkarta www.icmd.com www.idx.com www.pdbe.feugm.ac.id

ATTACHMENTS Table 1 Sample Selection Procedure

Sample Criteria 1) Company that listed in Indonesia Stock Exchange year 2004 2) Non-manufacture companies 3) Company that have no stock trading data continuously from year 2004-2008 4) Company that have no company profile in year 2008 Total Source: Processed secondary data

Total 330 (127) (68) (3) 132

Table 2 Operational Definition and Measurement No Variable Definition Measurement

Earnings Response Coefficient (ERC)

the response of the market toward the earnings information that released by the company

CARit : cumulative abnormal return company i in period t UEit : Unexpected earnings : ERC it : Component of error in the model of company i in period t

CAR

: Cummulative abnormal return company i in reseach period 2004-2008 five years

ARit

: Abnormal return

company i in year t

UEit

: Unexpected

earnings company i in period (year) t Eit : Accounting earnings company i in period (year ) t Eit-1 : Accounting earnings company i in period (year) before (t-

1)

Firm Size Firm size is (SIZE) the total asset that own by the company which reflects the ability for the company to generate earnings (Susilawati, 2008) Beta Risk Beta (BETA) coefficient, or beta for short define as the amount systematic risk present in a particular risky asset relative to that in average risky asset (Ross et al., 2008:418) Earnings Persistence (PERS) Earnings persistence is a measurement that explains market model CAPM formula by using

Rit Rmt

: return of company : market return in

i in year t year t

regression slope of the differences between current earnings and previous earnings (Chandrarin, 2003)

the ability of the company to persist the earnings that earn in current period until next period (Jaswadi, 2004). 5 Growth Opportuniti es (GRTH) Growth opportunity is the level of earnings growth of the company in one period to next period (Jaswadi, 2004)

Xit Xit-1

: Earnings of : Earnings of

company i in year t company i in year t-1

market-to-book ratio

value

Equity book value stock Equity market value average closing price outstanding stock

total equity/ outstanding = x

Capital Structure (LEV)

Capital structure represents the combination of fund for the company to run their business

Capital structure in this research is proxied by leverage ratio using the formula of companys total debt to its total assets of company i in year t (Petra, 2005)

(Ross et al., 2008) TL= Total liabilities TA = Total asset 7 Board Composition (BRDC) Board composition is the mix between insider and outsider board of directors. Inside director is a member of the boards who is as top executive of the company while outside director is the nonmanagement member of the board (Peng, 2008) audit quality is often related to the ability of the auditor to detect material misstatement percentage of independent directors compare with the total number of directors on the board of company i for year t

Audit Quality (AUDQ)

size of the audit firm whether form big four (B4) or non-big four (NB4) and measured by dummy variable (1,0). 1 firm : For the company audited by big four audit

of the 0 : For the company financial audited by others audit statements firm (competence) and his/her willingness to issue an appropriate audit report based on audit findings (independence ) Table 3 Statistic Descriptive of Research Variables
Variables Earnings Response Coefficient (ERC) Firm Size (SIZE) Beta Risk (BETA) Earnings Persistence (PERS) Growth Opportunities (GRTH) Capital Ratio (LEV) Board Composition (BRDC) Audit Quality (AUDQ) Min -2.3092 Max 1.1526 Range 3.4618 Average -0.0411 Median 0.0001 Std.Dev 0.3566

21.2205 0.0412 -3.1238

32.0223 0.1446 11.2865

10.8017 0.1034 14.4103 1308.858 72.73 1 1

27.3944 0.0847 0.4746 25.1901 1.1805 0.1484 0.3893

27.3883 0.0842 0.2559 0.1028 0.56 0 0

1.8167 0.0206 1.4599 150.9070 6.3163 0.2688 0.4895

-2.6971 1306.161 0 0 0 72.73 1 1

Source: Processed secondary data

Table 4 The Result Test of the Factors that Influence Earnings Response Coefficient

Variable

Predicti on

Coefficie nt

Std. Error

tStatist ic 0.68855 2 0.00560 6 -

Prob.

Constanta Firm Size (SIZE) Beta Risk (BETA) + -

0.082266 0.0000238 -0.838593

0.1194 77 0.0042 48 0.3421

0.492 6 0.995 5 0.015

76 Earnings Persistence (PERS) Growth Opportunities (GRTH) Capital Structure (LEV) Board Composition (BRDC) Audit Quality (AUDQ) F-statistic Prob. (Fstatistic) R-squared + -0.000564 0.0131 72 0.0000 44 0.0011 12 0.0296 34 0.0152 55

0.000159

2.45076 6 0.12407 3 3.62068 9 2.05650 8 1.85132 2 0.37823

9 0.901 5 0.000 5 0.042 2 0.066 9 0.706

-0.002287

-0.054861

+ 4.826986 0.000095 0.241714

-0.00577

Source: Processed secondary data