Abstract In the wake of numerous accounting scandals in the early 2000s, the U.S. began considering a move away from a more rule-based approach to accounting standard setting and toward a more principle-based approach to accounting standard setting. Although it is often assumed that this move toward a more principle-based approach is driven by stakeholder preferences, we examine whether this move is driven by demands for procedural justice. Specifically, we analyze one hundred and two comment letters submitted in response to the Financial Accounting Standard Board (FASB) proposal for principle-based standards. We find respondents from different stakeholder groups (preparers, accounting professionals, regulators, users, and academia) do not express a unified preference for rule-based or principle-based standards. We do, however, find that respondents identify benefits and costs of principle-based standards that map into the six elements of fair procedures (representativeness, accuracy, bias suppression, consistency ethicality, correctability). These elements are significantly associated with both the respondent's degree of support for the FASB proposal and the perceived quality of principle-based standards.

中文翻译：

---

迈向基于原则的美国会计准则制定方法：对程序正义和会计改革的需求

摘要在2000年代初发生了众多会计丑闻之后，美国开始考虑从基于规则的方法转向会计标准设置，而转向基于原则的方法进行会计标准设置。尽管通常认为这种朝着更加基于原则的方法迈进的过程是由利益相关者的偏好驱动的，但我们研究了这一步是否是由程序正义的要求驱动的。具体来说，我们分析了针对财务会计准则委员会（FASB）针对基于原则的准则的提案而提交的一百零二条评论信。我们发现来自不同利益相关者群体（准备者，会计专业人员，监管者，用户和学术界）的受访者并未对基于规则或基于原则的标准表示统一的偏爱。但是，我们确实 调查发现，受访者确定了基于原则的标准的收益和成本，这些原则和原则反映了公平程序的六个要素（代表性，准确性，抑制偏见，一致性伦理，可纠正性）。这些要素与受访者对FASB提案的支持程度以及基于原则的标准的感知质量都密切相关。