{"id":{"repo_id":"uiuc","oai_identifier":"oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/124504"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/uiuc/oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/124504","repository":{"repo_id":"uiuc","name":"University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign","base_url":"https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/oai-pmh"},"display":{"title":"Converting the skeptic but losing the faithful: An experimental examination of expanding and auditing information in ESG reports","abstract":"While socially responsible investing (SRI) has soared in recent years, some investors remain skeptical of ESG’s relevance. Despite these differing opinions, we understand little about how SRI preferences impact processing of ESG reporting. Drawing on motivated reasoning, I report an experiment that tests predictions about how two prominent ESG reporting attributes interact with investor SRI affinity. First, companies can choose ESG reporting frameworks that either disclose only financially material activities or all activities material to external stakeholders. I predict and find that retail investors adjust their willingness to invest based on alignment between their directional SRI goals and the company’s chosen ESG reporting framework. Second, companies commonly obtain assurance over only one of several ESG metrics. The introduction of an audited metric alongside unaudited metrics creates a salient disparity in the reliability across metrics, which I call a “reliability gap.” I predict and find that the reliability gap conveys lower ESG commitment, repelling higher SRI affinity investors while reassuring lower SRI affinity investors. One intriguing result is that a common combination of reporting choices designed to demonstrate a company’s ESG commitment – an expansive reporting framework and partial assurance – may win over the SRI skeptic while losing the SRI faithful.","abstract_html":"While socially responsible investing (SRI) has soared in recent years, some investors remain skeptical of ESG’s relevance. Despite these differing opinions, we understand little about how SRI preferences impact processing of ESG reporting. Drawing on motivated reasoning, I report an experiment that tests predictions about how two prominent ESG reporting attributes interact with investor SRI affinity. First, companies can choose ESG reporting frameworks that either disclose only financially material activities or all activities material to external stakeholders. I predict and find that retail investors adjust their willingness to invest based on alignment between their directional SRI goals and the company’s chosen ESG reporting framework. Second, companies commonly obtain assurance over only one of several ESG metrics. The introduction of an audited metric alongside unaudited metrics creates a salient disparity in the reliability across metrics, which I call a “reliability gap.” I predict and find that the reliability gap conveys lower ESG commitment, repelling higher SRI affinity investors while reassuring lower SRI affinity investors. One intriguing result is that a common combination of reporting choices designed to demonstrate a company’s ESG commitment – an expansive reporting framework and partial assurance – may win over the SRI skeptic while losing the SRI faithful.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Lyman, Rachel Bracken"],"institution":"University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign","degree_name":"Ph.D.","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Accountancy","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Peecher, Mark","Leiby, Justin","Mendoza, Kim","Hotaling, Jared"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2024,"date_issued":"2024-04-05","date_published":"2024-04-05","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:25:02Z","subjects":["Esg","Assurance","Single Materiality","Double Materiality","Socially Responsible Investing"],"languages":["eng","en"],"rights":["Copyright 2024 Rachel Lyman"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://hdl.handle.net/2142/124504","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Peecher, Mark","Leiby, Justin","Mendoza, Kim","Hotaling, Jared"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Lyman, Rachel Bracken"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2024-04-05","2024-05"]},{"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":["Esg","Assurance","Single Materiality","Double Materiality","Socially Responsible Investing"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["eng","en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["Copyright 2024 Rachel Lyman"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://hdl.handle.net/2142/124504"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["While socially responsible investing (SRI) has soared in recent years, some investors remain skeptical of ESG’s relevance. Despite these differing opinions, we understand little about how SRI preferences impact processing of ESG reporting. Drawing on motivated reasoning, I report an experiment that tests predictions about how two prominent ESG reporting attributes interact with investor SRI affinity. First, companies can choose ESG reporting frameworks that either disclose only financially material activities or all activities material to external stakeholders. I predict and find that retail investors adjust their willingness to invest based on alignment between their directional SRI goals and the company’s chosen ESG reporting framework. Second, companies commonly obtain assurance over only one of several ESG metrics. The introduction of an audited metric alongside unaudited metrics creates a salient disparity in the reliability across metrics, which I call a “reliability gap.” I predict and find that the reliability gap conveys lower ESG commitment, repelling higher SRI affinity investors while reassuring lower SRI affinity investors. One intriguing result is that a common combination of reporting choices designed to demonstrate a company’s ESG commitment – an expansive reporting framework and partial assurance – may win over the SRI skeptic while losing the SRI faithful.","Submission published under a 24 month embargo labeled 'U of I Access', the embargo will last until 2026-05-01","The student, Rachel Lyman, accepted the attached license on 2024-04-04 at 09:55.","The student, Rachel Lyman, submitted this Dissertation for approval on 2024-04-04 at 11:06.","This Dissertation was approved for publication on 2024-04-05 at 16:04.","DSpace SAF Submission Ingestion Package generated from Vireo submission #20300 on 2024-09-16 at 00:43:07"]},{"key":"dc:format","label":"Dc Format","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Converting the skeptic but losing the faithful: An experimental examination of expanding and auditing information in ESG reports"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Peecher, Mark","Leiby, Justin","Mendoza, Kim","Hotaling, Jared"],"dc:creator":["Lyman, Rachel Bracken"],"dc:date":["2024-04-05","2024-05"],"dc:description":["While socially responsible investing (SRI) has soared in recent years, some investors remain skeptical of ESG’s relevance. Despite these differing opinions, we understand little about how SRI preferences impact processing of ESG reporting. Drawing on motivated reasoning, I report an experiment that tests predictions about how two prominent ESG reporting attributes interact with investor SRI affinity. First, companies can choose ESG reporting frameworks that either disclose only financially material activities or all activities material to external stakeholders. I predict and find that retail investors adjust their willingness to invest based on alignment between their directional SRI goals and the company’s chosen ESG reporting framework. Second, companies commonly obtain assurance over only one of several ESG metrics. The introduction of an audited metric alongside unaudited metrics creates a salient disparity in the reliability across metrics, which I call a “reliability gap.” I predict and find that the reliability gap conveys lower ESG commitment, repelling higher SRI affinity investors while reassuring lower SRI affinity investors. One intriguing result is that a common combination of reporting choices designed to demonstrate a company’s ESG commitment – an expansive reporting framework and partial assurance – may win over the SRI skeptic while losing the SRI faithful.","Submission published under a 24 month embargo labeled 'U of I Access', the embargo will last until 2026-05-01","The student, Rachel Lyman, accepted the attached license on 2024-04-04 at 09:55.","The student, Rachel Lyman, submitted this Dissertation for approval on 2024-04-04 at 11:06.","This Dissertation was approved for publication on 2024-04-05 at 16:04.","DSpace SAF Submission Ingestion Package generated from Vireo submission #20300 on 2024-09-16 at 00:43:07"],"dc:format":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier":["https://hdl.handle.net/2142/124504"],"dc:language":["eng","en"],"dc:rights":["Copyright 2024 Rachel Lyman"],"dc:subject":["Esg","Assurance","Single Materiality","Double Materiality","Socially Responsible Investing"],"dc:title":["Converting the skeptic but losing the faithful: An experimental examination of expanding and auditing information in ESG reports"],"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":"2026-07-22T22:25:02Z"}