{"id":{"repo_id":"uiuc","oai_identifier":"oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/105164"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/uiuc/oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/105164","repository":{"repo_id":"uiuc","name":"University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign","base_url":"https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/oai-pmh"},"display":{"title":"How review ambiguity and access costs of SEC review correspondence affect investor judgments","abstract":"Review correspondence between the SEC and firms is a potentially valuable resource for investors. Review correspondence often reveals information about firms’ financial reporting quality, which has important implications for investors’ processing of financial information and investment judgments. However, there is little evidence on how characteristics of review correspondence influence investors’ decision processes. Drawing on psychology theory, I predict that two key informational characteristics—review ambiguity (i.e., a lack of transparency about outcomes from the SEC’s review process) and access costs (i.e., the amount of effort required to access review correspondence)—jointly influence investors’ information processing and their resulting investment judgments. Results show that investors integrate information to a greater extent as review ambiguity decreases, but only when access costs are relatively low. Review ambiguity has no effect on investors’ integration of review correspondence information when access costs are relatively high. Further, review ambiguity and access costs also jointly affect investors’ resulting investment judgments. My results provide important new insights on potential costs to investors from the extent of SEC transparency during its review process, particularly as information becomes more easily accessible.","abstract_html":"Review correspondence between the SEC and firms is a potentially valuable resource for investors. Review correspondence often reveals information about firms’ financial reporting quality, which has important implications for investors’ processing of financial information and investment judgments. However, there is little evidence on how characteristics of review correspondence influence investors’ decision processes. Drawing on psychology theory, I predict that two key informational characteristics—review ambiguity (i.e., a lack of transparency about outcomes from the SEC’s review process) and access costs (i.e., the amount of effort required to access review correspondence)—jointly influence investors’ information processing and their resulting investment judgments. Results show that investors integrate information to a greater extent as review ambiguity decreases, but only when access costs are relatively low. Review ambiguity has no effect on investors’ integration of review correspondence information when access costs are relatively high. Further, review ambiguity and access costs also jointly affect investors’ resulting investment judgments. My results provide important new insights on potential costs to investors from the extent of SEC transparency during its review process, particularly as information becomes more easily accessible.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Gale, Brian Thomas"],"institution":"University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign","degree_name":"Ph.D.","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Accountancy","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Elliott, W. Brooke","Brown, Nerissa","Hobson, Jessen","White, Tiffany","Williamson, Michael"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2019,"date_issued":"2019-08-23T20:44:39Z","date_published":"2019-08-23T20:44:39Z","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:24:44Z","subjects":["review ambiguity","access costs","review correspondence","information processing","willingness to invest","reporting quality"],"languages":["en"],"rights":["Copyright 2019 Brian Gale"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/2142/105164","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Elliott, W. Brooke","Brown, Nerissa","Hobson, Jessen","White, Tiffany","Williamson, Michael"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Gale, Brian Thomas"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2019-08-23T20:44:39Z","2021-08-24T09:15:10Z","2019-04-08","2019-05"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Accountancy"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ph.D."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["review ambiguity","access costs","review correspondence","information processing","willingness to invest","reporting quality"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["Copyright 2019 Brian Gale"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/105164"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["Review correspondence between the SEC and firms is a potentially valuable resource for investors. Review correspondence often reveals information about firms’ financial reporting quality, which has important implications for investors’ processing of financial information and investment judgments. However, there is little evidence on how characteristics of review correspondence influence investors’ decision processes. Drawing on psychology theory, I predict that two key informational characteristics—review ambiguity (i.e., a lack of transparency about outcomes from the SEC’s review process) and access costs (i.e., the amount of effort required to access review correspondence)—jointly influence investors’ information processing and their resulting investment judgments. Results show that investors integrate information to a greater extent as review ambiguity decreases, but only when access costs are relatively low. Review ambiguity has no effect on investors’ integration of review correspondence information when access costs are relatively high. Further, review ambiguity and access costs also jointly affect investors’ resulting investment judgments. My results provide important new insights on potential costs to investors from the extent of SEC transparency during its review process, particularly as information becomes more easily accessible.","Submission published under a 24 month embargo labeled 'Closed Access', the embargo will last until 2021-05-01","The student, Brian Gale, accepted the attached license on 2019-04-07 at 07:52.","The student, Brian Gale, submitted this Dissertation for approval on 2019-04-07 at 07:58.","This Dissertation was approved for publication on 2019-04-08 at 14:47.","DSpace SAF Submission Ingestion Package generated from Vireo submission #13505 on 2019-08-22 at 16:20:50","Made available in DSpace on 2019-08-23T20:44:39Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 GALE-DISSERTATION-2019.pdf: 2305790 bytes, checksum: d3cf1df135f520cf53c972f93657bbcc (MD5) LICENSE.txt: 4207 bytes, checksum: f1ad0b1f6347f90cbeb6d4b9b3c276b6 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019-04-08","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 112283 Lift date: 2021-08-23T20:44:50Z Reason: Author requested closed access (OA after 2yrs) in Vireo ETD system","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 112283 Lift date: 2021-08-23T20:46:41Z Reason: Author requested closed access (OA after 2yrs) in Vireo ETD system","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 112283 Lift date: 2021-08-23T20:47:38Z Reason: Author requested closed access (OA after 2yrs) in Vireo ETD system","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 112283 Lift date: 2021-08-23T20:48:32Z Reason: Author requested closed access (OA after 2yrs) in Vireo ETD system","Limited Restriction Lifted for Item 112283 on 2021-08-24T09:15:10Z."]},{"key":"dc:format","label":"Dc Format","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["How review ambiguity and access costs of SEC review correspondence affect investor judgments"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Elliott, W. Brooke","Brown, Nerissa","Hobson, Jessen","White, Tiffany","Williamson, Michael"],"dc:creator":["Gale, Brian Thomas"],"dc:date":["2019-08-23T20:44:39Z","2021-08-24T09:15:10Z","2019-04-08","2019-05"],"dc:description":["Review correspondence between the SEC and firms is a potentially valuable resource for investors. Review correspondence often reveals information about firms’ financial reporting quality, which has important implications for investors’ processing of financial information and investment judgments. However, there is little evidence on how characteristics of review correspondence influence investors’ decision processes. Drawing on psychology theory, I predict that two key informational characteristics—review ambiguity (i.e., a lack of transparency about outcomes from the SEC’s review process) and access costs (i.e., the amount of effort required to access review correspondence)—jointly influence investors’ information processing and their resulting investment judgments. Results show that investors integrate information to a greater extent as review ambiguity decreases, but only when access costs are relatively low. Review ambiguity has no effect on investors’ integration of review correspondence information when access costs are relatively high. Further, review ambiguity and access costs also jointly affect investors’ resulting investment judgments. My results provide important new insights on potential costs to investors from the extent of SEC transparency during its review process, particularly as information becomes more easily accessible.","Submission published under a 24 month embargo labeled 'Closed Access', the embargo will last until 2021-05-01","The student, Brian Gale, accepted the attached license on 2019-04-07 at 07:52.","The student, Brian Gale, submitted this Dissertation for approval on 2019-04-07 at 07:58.","This Dissertation was approved for publication on 2019-04-08 at 14:47.","DSpace SAF Submission Ingestion Package generated from Vireo submission #13505 on 2019-08-22 at 16:20:50","Made available in DSpace on 2019-08-23T20:44:39Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 GALE-DISSERTATION-2019.pdf: 2305790 bytes, checksum: d3cf1df135f520cf53c972f93657bbcc (MD5) LICENSE.txt: 4207 bytes, checksum: f1ad0b1f6347f90cbeb6d4b9b3c276b6 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019-04-08","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 112283 Lift date: 2021-08-23T20:44:50Z Reason: Author requested closed access (OA after 2yrs) in Vireo ETD system","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 112283 Lift date: 2021-08-23T20:46:41Z Reason: Author requested closed access (OA after 2yrs) in Vireo ETD system","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 112283 Lift date: 2021-08-23T20:47:38Z Reason: Author requested closed access (OA after 2yrs) in Vireo ETD system","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 112283 Lift date: 2021-08-23T20:48:32Z Reason: Author requested closed access (OA after 2yrs) in Vireo ETD system","Limited Restriction Lifted for Item 112283 on 2021-08-24T09:15:10Z."],"dc:format":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/105164"],"dc:language":["en"],"dc:rights":["Copyright 2019 Brian Gale"],"dc:subject":["review ambiguity","access costs","review correspondence","information processing","willingness to invest","reporting quality"],"dc:title":["How review ambiguity and access costs of SEC review correspondence affect investor judgments"],"dc:type":["text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Accountancy"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ph.D."],"thesis:institution_name":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:24:44Z"}