The current study aims to investigate empirically the main incentives for mandatory and voluntary risk reporting (MRR and VRR) across the USA, the UK and Germany, each of which has a unique approach towards risk reporting. While the UK approach encourages more voluntary risk reporting above imposing risk rules, the German approach formally requires firms to provide risk information in a certain place in their annual report narratives. The US approach is a compromise between these two approaches; it obligates and encourages firms to provide more information about their risks mandatorily and/or voluntarily, respectively. Investigating the incentives for risk reporting in such set of countries answers the calls of some prior research (e.g., Linsley and Shrives, 2006; Dobler, 2008; Dobler, Lajili and Zeghal, 2011) to deepen our understanding of what motivates firms to disclose their risks. To this end, computerised content analysis and multilevel analysis (MLA) on a large scale (compared with previous work e.g., Linsley and Shrives, 2005, 2006; Abraham and Cox, 2007) are utilised. The results are produced in four cumulative contexts through Chapters Six to Nine. These results are consistent with managers’ incentives theories (discussed in Chapter Two) and prior risk reporting literature (discussed in Chapter Three and Chapter Four). Based on 15 firms in each country during 2007 and 2008, multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) results reveal significant differences between a firm’s risk levels and its risk disclosure levels across the USA, the UK and Germany. The correlation results indicate that these differences are statistically correlated, supporting the main argument of the current study that differences in a firm’s risk levels should be reflected in their risk reporting practices (Chapter Six). Based on 1160 firm-years of non-financial firms of the FTSE all share index over 2005-2008, linear mixed model (LMM) results document that firms with higher levels of systematic and financing risks are likely to exhibit significantly higher levels of aggregated and voluntary risk reporting, whereas firms with high variability of stock returns or lower levels of liquidity are likely to exhibit significantly lower levels of aggregated and voluntary risk reporting. The current study also finds, however, that MRR is associated significantly and positively with firm size rather than with risk levels. The results also indicate that managers of firms exhibiting greater compliance with UK risk reporting regulations have greater incentives to disclose voluntary risk information (Chapter Seven). When the study extends the scope to the other two countries, different patterns of relations are found. Based on 1270, 1410 and 1005 firm-year observations over 2005 to 2009 in the USA, the UK and Germany, respectively, repeated measures multilevel analysis (RMMLA) results suggest that, in the USA, MRR is more sensitive to firm risk levels (total, systematic and liquidity risks) than is VRR, which is more correlated to other firm characteristics. The UK results suggest that VRR is more sensitive to firm risk levels (systematic and liquidity risks) than is MRR, which is dominated by firm size, among other firm characteristics. In Germany, however, both MRR and VRR are significantly related to risk levels (total, systematic, un-systematic, financing and liquidity risks) (Chapter Eight). Based on 3685 firm-year observations during the period between 2005 and 2009, and concerning both firm- and country-level analyses, repeated measures multilevel analysis (RMMLA) results support that variations in MRR can be attributed to differences in the legal systems (country characteristics) and in firm size (firm characteristics). The variations in VRR are more associated with firm characteristics, especially a firm’s risk levels across the USA, the UK and Germany (Chapter Nine). These results have many implications and support the respective regulatory approach adopted within each country by interpreting the extent to which either MRR or VRR is more or less sensitive to underlying risks.

This dissertation study explored: 1) instructors’ use of discussion strategies that enhance meaningful learner interactions in online discussions and student performance, and 2) learners’ interaction patterns in online discussions that lead to better student performance in online introductory mathematics courses. In particular, the study applied a set of data mining techniques to a large-scale dataset automatically collected by the Canvas Learning Management System (LMS) for five consecutive years at a public university in the U.S., which included 2,869 students enrolled in 72 courses. First, the study found that the courses that posted more open-ended prompts, evaluated students’ discussion messages posted by students, used focused discussion settings (i.e., allowing a single response and replies to that response), and provided more elaborated feedback had higher students final grades than those which did not. Second, the results showed the instructors’ use of discussion strategies (discussion structures) influenced the quantity (volume of discussion), the breadth (distribution of participation throughout the discussion), and the quality of learner interactions (levels of knowledge construction) in online discussions. Lastly, the results also revealed that the students’ messages related to allocentric elaboration (i.e., taking other peers’ contributions in argumentive or evaluative ways) and application (i.e., application of new knowledge) showed the highest predictive value for their course performance. The findings from this study suggest that it is important to provide opportunities for learners to freely discuss course content, rather than creating a discussion task related to producing a correct answer, in introductory mathematics courses. Other findings reported in the study can also serve as guidance for instructors or instructional designers on how to design better online mathematics courses.

No / This paper investigates the impact of corporate risk levels on aggregated, voluntary and mandatory risk disclosures in the annual report narratives of UK non-financial listed companies. We find that firms characterised by higher levels of systematic, financing risks and risk-adjusted returns and those with lower levels of stock return variability are likely to exhibit significantly higher levels of aggregated and voluntary risk disclosures. The results also show that firms of large size, high dividend-yield, high board independence, low (high) insider (outsider) ownership, and effective audit environments are likely to exhibit higher levels of aggregated and voluntary risk disclosures than other firms. Similarly, mandatory risk disclosures are influenced positively by firm size, dividend-yield and board independence and negatively by high leverage. The results suggest that managers of firms exhibiting greater compliance with mandatory regulations have a greater propensity to make voluntary risk disclosures. When we distinguish between high- and low-risk firms, we find that high-risk firms appear to be more sensitive to underlying risk levels, resulting in more disclosure of both voluntary and mandatory risk information than in the case of low-risk firms. The results generally support the present UK emphasis on encouraging rather than mandating risk disclosure. Nevertheless, under this regime, the voluntary risk disclosures of some firms, e.g., those characterised by higher-volatility market returns, do not reflect their underlying risk levels.

Yes / This paper provides a wide-ranging and up-to-date (1997-2016) review of the archival empirical risk-reporting literature. The reviewed papers are classified into two principal themes: the incentives for and/or informativeness of risk reporting. Our review demonstrates areas of significant divergence in the literature specifically: mandatory versus voluntary risk reporting, manual versus automated content analysis, within-country versus cross-country variations in risk reporting, and risk reporting in financial versus non-financial firms. Our paper identifies a number of issues which require further research. In particular we draw attention to two: first, a lack of clarity and consistency around the conceptualization of risk; and second, the potential costs and benefits of standard-setters’ involvement

No / This paper utilises computerised textual analysis to explore the extent to which both firm and country characteristics influence mandatory and voluntary risk reporting (MRR and VRR) variations both within and between non-financial firms across Germany, the UK and the US, over the period from 2005 to 2010. We find significant variations in MRR and VRR between firms across the three countries. Further, we find, on average, that German firms tend to disclose significantly higher (lower) levels of risk information mandatorily than UK (US) firms. German firms, on average, tend to reveal considerably higher (lower) levels of VRR than US (UK) firms. Our results document that MRR and VRR variations are significantly influenced by systematic risk, the legal system and cultural values. We also find that country and firm characteristics have higher explanatory power over the observed variations in MRR than over those in VRR.