Testing Accrual-Based Model for Detecting Earnings Management: Comparison of Finland and France

The aim of this study is to test the accrual-based model suggested by Dechow et al. (1995) in order to detect and compare earnings management practices in Finnish and French companies. Also the impact of financial crisis of 2008 on earnings management behavior in these countries is tested by dividing the whole time period of 2003-2012 into two sub-periods: pre-crisis (2003-2008) and post-crisis (2009-2012). Results support the idea that companies in both countries have significant earnings management practices. During the post-crisis period companies in Finland show income inflating practices, while in France the opposite tendency is noticed (income deflating) during the same period. Results of the assumption that managers in highly concentrated companies are engaged in income enhancing practices vary in two countries. While in Finland managers are trying to show better performance for bonuses or other contractual compensation motivations, in France they avoid paying dividends or high taxes.

The Rejection of Prioritarianism

Since the late 1990’s, a group of moral doctrines called prioritarianism has received a lot of interest from many moral philosophers. Many contemporary moral philosophers are attracted to prioritarianism to such an extent that they can be called prioritarians. In this book, however, I reject prioritarianism, including not only “pure” prioritarianism but also hybrid prioritarian views which mix one or more non-prioritarian elements with prioritarianism. This book largely revolves around certain problems and complications of prioritarianism and its particular forms. Those problems and complications are connected to risk, impartiality, the arbitrariness of prioritarian weightings and possible future individuals. On the one hand, I challenge prioritarianism through targeted objections to various specific forms of prioritarianism. All those targeted objections are connected to risk or possible future individuals. It seems to me that together they give good grounds for believing that prioritarianism is not the way to go. On the other hand, I challenge prioritarianism by pointing out and discussing certain general problems of prioritarianism. Those general problems are connected to impartiality and the arbitrariness of prioritarian weightings. They may give additional grounds for believing that all prioritarian views should be rejected. Prioritarianism can be seen as a type of weighted utilitarianism and thus as an extension of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is morally ultimately concerned, and morally ultimately concerned only, with some kind of maximization of utility or expected utility. Prioritarianism, on the other hand, is morally ultimately concerned, and morally ultimately concerned only, with some kind of maximization of priority-weighted utility, expected priority-weighted utility or priority-weighted expected utility. Thus prioritarianism, unlike utilitarianism, is a distribution-sensitive moral view. Besides rejecting prioritarianism, I reject also various other distribution-sensitive moral views in this book. However, I do not reject distribution-sensitivity in morality, as I end up endorsing a type of distribution-sensitive hybrid utilitarianism which mixes non-utilitarian elements with utilitarianism.

Metrics for Predicting User Behavior and Experience in an Interactive Storytelling System

In much of the previous research into the field of interactive storytelling, the focus has been on the creation of complete systems, then evaluating the performance of those systems based on user experience. Less focus has been placed on finding general solutions to problems that manifest in many different types of interactive storytelling systems. The goal of this thesis was to identify potential candidates for metrics that a system could use to predict player behavior or how players experience the story they are presented with, and to put these metrics to an empirical test. The three metrics that were used were morality, relationships and conflict. The game used for user testing of the metrics, Regicide is an interactive storytelling experience that was created in conjunction with Eero Itkonen. Data, in the forms of internal system data and survey answers, collected through user testing, was used to evaluate hypotheses for each metric. Out of the three chosen metrics, morality performed the best in this study. Though further research and refinement may be required, the results were promising, and point to the conclusion that user responses to questions of morality are a strong predictor for their choices in similar situations later on in the course of an interactive story. A similar examination for user relationships with other characters in the story did not produce promising results, but several problems were recognized in terms of methodology and further research with a better optimized system may yield different results. On the subject of conflict, several aspects, proposed by Ware et al. (2012), were evaluated separately. Results were inconclusive, with the aspect of directness showing the most promise.