It’s about how the task is set: The inc...

Managerial decision-making often rests on information that is preprocessed and therefore considerably reduced compared to the raw data. In our study we investigate to what extent the frame in information processing (selection of information on inclusion or exclusion basis) affects the provision of managerial information, and also whether and how this inclusion-exclusion effect is influenced by procedural accountability. We aim to investigate whether there is evidence to support the suggestion that accountability mechanisms may serve as adequate control mechanisms to mitigate inclusion-exclusion discrepancies. In a 2x2 experimental setting, 191 graduate and undergraduate students were asked to prepare a proper informational foundation for subsequent decisions to be made by a firm’s management. The students were asked to actively select (financial and non-financial) figures they consider to be of particular importance or to exclude figures they do not consider relevant. Half of the subjects were held explicitly accountable for the decision process, while the other half were not. Results show that (1) inclusion and exclusion are non-complementary modes of information selection, and (2) accountability increases the quantity of information reported, the time spent deciding which information to report, and also inclusion-exclusion discrepancies, though to varying degrees depending on the type of information considered.