رتبه بندی ویژگیهای کیفی اطلاعات حسابداری بر اساس دیدگاه تهیه کنندگان، حسابرسان و استفاده کنندگان صورت های مالی: کاربرد فرایند تحلیل سلسله مراتبی (AHP)

خصوصیات کیفی مطلوب « .) آقایی، محمدعلی و موسوی شیری، سید محمود ، ) 1384
- .114 81 ؛ دوماهنامه دانشور رفتا ، ر 14 .» روش های اندازه گیری از دید استفاده کنندگان ایرانی
.٢ استفاده از ویژگی های کیفی اطلاعات مالی در « .) احمدپور، احمد و احمدی، احمد، ) 1387
- .1١ 3 ؛ بررسیهای حسابداری و حسابرس ، ی ١٢ .» ارزیابی کیفیت سود
.3 تهران، انتشارات دانشگاه تهران. .» تصمیم گیری چند معیاره « .) اصغرپور، محمد جواد، ) 1377
.4 بررسی تاثیر فناوری اطلاعات « .) اعتمادی، حسین، الهی، شعبان، حسن آقایی، کامران ) 138١
- .٢4 3 ؛ بررسیهای حسابداری و حسابرس ، ی 43 .» بر ویژگیهای کیفی اطلاعات حسابداری
.١ رابطه تدوین استانداردهای حسابداری با کیفیت « .) ثقفی، علی و ابراهیمی، ابراهیم، ) 1388
- .١1 33 ؛ بررسیهای حسابداری و حسابرس ، ی ١7 .» اطلاعات حسابداری
.١ کمیته تدوین استانداردهای حسابداری، ) 138١ (، مبانی نظری حسابداری و گزارشگری مالی
در ایرا ، ن سازمان حسابرسی، تهران، مرکز تحقیقات تخصصی حسابداری و حسابرسی سازمان
حسابرسی.
7. Ballou, D. P, Wang R. Y, Pazer, H. and Tayi, K. G. (2003). Modeling information manufacturing systems to determine information product quality.
8. Barth, Mary, Wayne Landsman, Lang, Mark. (2008) International A(ccounting Standards and Accounting Quality. Journal of Accounting Research; 46, No. 3.
9. Belton, V. and Steward, T. (2002). “Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis”, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
10. Daven port, T. H and prusak, L. (1998). "Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know Harward Business, school press, Boston, Massachusetts. USA.
11. FASAC (2004). "The FASB's Conceptual Framework: Relevance and Reliability", Financial Accounting Standards Advisory Council.
12. FASB (1980). "Qualitative Characteristics of Accounting Information", statement of financial accounting concepts No. 2.
13. FASB/IASB, (2006), Preliminary views on an Improved Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting: The Objective of Financial Reporting and Qualitative Characteristics of Decision-useful Financial Reporting Information. Issued for comment by the Financial Accounting Standards Board and by the International Accounting Standards Board.
14. Financial Accounting Standard Board Steering Committee. (2000). “Business Reporting Research Project”. FASB. www. fasb. org.
15. Financial Accounting Standard Board, FASB. (1976). The Conceptual Framework for Financial Accounting and Reporting: Elements of
26 فصلنامه مطالعات تجربی حسابداری مالی، سال یازدهم، شماره 83 ، تابستان 2832
Financial statements and their measurement, standard Conn: FASB, PP: 4- 23
16. Figueira, J., GreSo, S. and Ehrgott, M. (2006). “Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys”, Springer Science & Business Media, Inc. , Boston, MA.
17. Guitouni, A. and Martel, J-M. (1998). “Tentative guidelines to help choosing an appropriate MCDA method”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 109 No. 2, pp. 501-21.
18. Hanne, T. (2002). “Intelligent Strategies for Meta Multiple Criteria Decision Making, (International Series in Operations Research & Management Science)“, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
19. Hudack, Lawrence R. and McAllister, John P. (1994). "An Investigation of the FASB's Application of Its Decision Usefulness Criteria" Accounting Horizons. PP: 1- 18
20. Kohlbeck, Mark, Warfield, Terry. The Effects of Principles-based Accounting Standards on Accounting Quality 2005; SSRN Website.
21. Kahn, B. Strang. D. M and Wang, R. Y. (1997). A model for delivering Quality Information as product and service. Massachusetts Institute of technology. pp. 80- 94
22. Kenedy. D. T. , Joseph Ugras. Y. , Leauby. A. B, Tavana. M. (1995). “An Investigation of the Relative Importance Attached to the Qualitative Characteristics in the SFAC 2 Hierarchy”, Accounting Enquiries. Vol 4.
23. Kinney, w. , (2000), Information Quality Assurance and Internal Control for Management Decision Making, New York, NY: Mc Graw-Hill.
24. Kirytopoulos, K. , Greece, C. , Leopoulos, V. , and Voulgaridou, D. (2008). “Supplier selection in pharmaceutical industry: An analytic network process approach”, National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Greece; Benchmarking: An International Journal; Vol. 15 No. 4, 494-516.
25. Laaribi, A. , Chevalier, J. and Martel, J. (1996). “A spatial decision aid: a multicriterion evaluation approach Computers”, Environment and Urban Systems, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 351-66.
26. Machlup, F. (1983). Semantic Quirks in Studies of Information. in the study of information: Interdisciplinary Messages. John Wiley and Sons, NY, USA.
27. Matthew. B, Rajendra. P. S, Brenda. M, (2003). A conceptual Framework and Belif- Function Approach to Assessing Overall Information Quality. International Journal of Intelligent System, volume 18,No 1 –PP: 28- 44.
28. Malcolm smith (1996). Qualitative characteristics in accounting disclosures: a desirability trade-off, managerial auditing journal pp: 11- 16
رتبهبندی ویژگیهای کیفی اطلاعات حسابداری... 27
29. Mattew. B, Rannjendra, P. S, Bbrenda, M. (2000). “A Conceptual Framework and Belief- Function Approach to Assesing Overall Information Quality”. International Journal of Intelligent System Volume 18, No. 1. January, pp. 51-74
30. Peniwati, K. (2005). “Criteria for evaluating group decision-making methods”, Springer, New York, NY.
31. Saaty, T. (2007). “Time dependent decision-making; dynamic priorities in the AHP/ANP: Generalizing from points to functions and from real to complex variables”, Mathematical and Computer Modeling vol 46, pp. 860–891. .
32. Sander, T. H. Hatfield, H. R. and Moore, U. (1938). “A Statement of Accounting Principles”. New York: American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
33. Shanks. G, Darke. P. (1998). Understanding Data Quality in a Data Warehouse. The Australian Computer Journal. Vol30, pp. 122- 128.
34. Snavely, H. (1967). “Accounting Information Criteria”. the accounting review. NO. 42. April. pp. 223- 232
35. Stanga k. g. (1980) the relationship between relevance and reliability: some empirical results. accounting and business research. pp: 29- 39
36. Thornton, Daniel, B. Financial Reporting Quality: Implications of Accounting Research. Submited to the senate standing committee on banking, trade and commerce 2002; May 29.
37. Wand, Y. Wang, R. Y. (1996). “Anchoring Data Quality Dimensions in Ontological Foundation”. Communication of the ACM, November, 39(11), pp. 86- 95
38. Yang, C. & Chen, B. (2006), “Supplier selection using combined analytical hierarchy process and gray relational analysis”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 17 No. 7, pp. 926- 41.
39. Zak, J. (2005), “The comparison of multiobjective ranking methods applied to solve the mass transit systems’ decision problems”, e- Proceedings of the 16th Mini – EURO Conference and 10th Meeting of EWGT, Poznan, 13-16 September, available at: www. iasi. rm. cnr. it/ ewgt/16conference/ID154. pd