This study provides the first comprehensive literature review on interim reporting based on 112 papers published between 1961 and 2020. The review focuses on both the firm-specific consequences (capital market-based and real effects) and externalities of interim reporting. We analyze three primary interim reporting characteristics: (1) frequency, (2) contents, and (3) assurance. The review allows us to summarize the existing literature, reconcile different findings, identify trends in the literature, and present avenues for future research. We observe that investors perceive interim reports to be useful. However, no clear evidence exists for strong capital market-based benefits of higher reporting frequency, such as increases in liquidity. Higher reporting frequency seems to imply stricter monitoring, especially in the absence of other effective monitoring mechanisms. Nonetheless, it can also induce myopic decision-making. More comprehensive reports convey more information at the costs of increases in reporting lags and processing time. Surprisingly, the current literature does not find that interim assurance leads to higher interim report quality.

本研究基于 1961 年至 2020 年间发表的 112 篇论文，对中期报告进行了首次全面的文献综述。该综述侧重于中期报告的公司特定后果（基于资本市场和实际影响）和外部性。我们分析了三个主要的中期报告特征：（1）频率，（2）内容，和（3）保证。回顾使我们能够总结现有的文献，协调不同的发现，确定文献的趋势，并为未来的研究提供途径。我们观察到投资者认为中期报告是有用的。然而，没有明确的证据表明更高的报告频率会带来基于资本市场的强大好处，例如流动性的增加。更高的报告频率似乎意味着更严格的监控，特别是在没有其他有效的监测机制的情况下。尽管如此，它也可能导致近视决策。更全面的报告以增加报告滞后和处理时间为代价传达更多信息。令人惊讶的是，目前的文献并未发现中期保证会导致更高的中期报告质量。