Godfrey Summary Accounting Theory Chapter 5 Measurement
Godfrey Summary Accounting Theory Chapter 5 Measurement
Godfrey Summary Accounting Theory Chapter 5 Measurement
ACCOUNTING THEORY
(SUBJECT CODE: ECAU601401)
Chapter 5
Measurement Theory
(Godfrey et.al. Accounting Theory 7th Ed)
Lecturer:
Mrs. Siti Nuryanah, S.E., M.S.M., M.Bus.Acc., Ph.D.
Group Member
1. Eggie Auliya Husna 1706105246
2. Fendhi Birowo 1706105290
3. M. Avisena 1406612275
4. Yolanda Tamara 1506736064
2
CHAPTER 5
MEASUREMENT THEORY
3
Ordinal scale
An ordinal scale is created when an operation ranks the objects in question with respect to a
given property. For example, investment instrument ranking 1,2,3 according to their net present
values, the highest ranked as 1 and the lowest as 3. The operation (calculation of net present
value) gives rise to an ordinal scale, which is the set of numbers referring to the investment
alternatives. The numbers indicate the order of the size of the net present value of the options
and, therefore, their profitability.
A weakness of the ordinal scale is that the intervals between the numbers (1 to 2, 2 to 3, 3 to 4)
do not tell us anything about the differences in the quantity of the property they represent. They
are maybe very close each other. Another weakness is that the numbers do not signify “how
much” of the attribute the objects possess.
The natural zero point could be a neutral point where in one direction are all the expected
profitable alternatives and in the other direction are all the expected profitable alternatives and in
the other direction are the expected unprofitable ones. The numbers assigned to the options on
one side of the zero point would have positive signs and, on the other, negative signs.
Interval scale
The interval scale imparts more information than the ordinal scale. Not only is the ranking of the
objects known with respect to the given property, but the distance between the interval on the
scale is equal and known. A selected zero point also exist on the scale. An example is Celcius
scale of temperature. The weakness of interval scale is that the zero point is arbitrarily
established.
Mattessich mentions standard cost accounting as one example where the interval scale is used in
accounting. The standard may be based on theoretical, average, practical, or normal
performance. Because the choice is more or less arbitrary, the calculation of standards and
variances generates an interval scales. If the variance is zero, this signifies neutrality, but this
point is arbitrarily selected.
Ratio scale
A ratio scale is one where:
The rank order of the objects or events with respect to a given property is known
The intervals between the objects are equal and are known
A unique origin, a natural zero point, exist where the distance from it for at least one object is
known.
The ratio scale conveys the most information. An example of the ratio scale is the measurmeent
of length, and an example in accounting is the use of dollars to represent cost and value.
4
If X represents all the points of a given scale, and each point is multiplied by a constant c, the
resulting scale X’ will also be a ratio scale. The reason is that the structure of the scale is left
invariant, that is:
The rank order of the point is uncharged
The ratios of the points are unchanged
The zero point is unchanged
Invariance of the scale means that, regardless of the measured used, the measurement system will
provide the same general form of the variables and the decision maker will make the same
decisions. This is not the case in accounting, as different systems are variant to each other.
Income measured under one system will lead to different decisions from income measured under
another system. The systems won‟t provide the same information.
Nominal and ordinal scales no arithmetic operations
Interval scales addition and subtraction
Ratio scales all arithmetic operations
Reliable measurement
Reliability refers to the proven consistency of either an operation to produce satisfactory results
or the results (the numbers) themselves for a particular use. In statistics, reliability demands that
measurements be repeatable or reproducible, thereby demonstrating their consistency. The notion
of reliability incorporates two aspects: the accuracy and certainty of measurement, and the
representative faithfulness of disclosures in relation to the underlying economic transactions and
events. The measurement aspect concerns the precision of measurement.
Accurate measurement
Consistency of results, precision and reliability do not necessarily lead to accuracy. The reason is
that accuracy has to do with how close the measurement is to the „true value‟ of the attribute
measure, the „bullseye‟, so to speak. Fundamental properties, such as the length of an object, can
be determined to be accurate by comparing the object with a standard that represents true value.
The problem is that for many measurements the true value is not known. In order to determine
accuracy in accounting, we need to know what attribute we should measure to achieve the
purpose of the measurement. Accuracy measurement relates to the pragmatic notion of
usefulness, but accountants are not in agreement as to what the specific, quantitative standards
are that are implied. For example, we can calculate the cost of the inventory by FIFO and repeat
the calculations a thousand times but it cannot ensure the answer is accurate. Instead of using the
term „accuracy‟ which is so often to mean arithmetical precision, it may be prudent to use the
term of the social scientists, „validity‟.
MEASUREMENT IN ACCOUNTING
Measurement in accounting falls into the category of derivied measurement for both capital and
profit. Capital is derivied from transactions and revaluations that occur in financial markets, and
profit can be derivied from the matching of expenses with revenue or the change in capital over
the period. Capital can be defined and derivied in various way, including historical cost,
operating, financial, or „fair value‟.
6
History shows us that the concepts of capital and profit have changed and evolved overtime so
that there are a number of concepts of fundamental measurements. Here is the timeline:
In the first thousand years AD, the economic structure was represented by decentralised, self-
contained fiefdoms.
After the crusades to the Holy Land in the eleventh century, the opening up of the Middle
Eastern and Asian trade routes created a demand for tradeable goods (silk, spices, carpets).
The Italian trading cities played a major role transporting crusaders to the Holy Land and
returning with goods.
The eighteenth century in England saw the development of joint stock companies with limited
liability, a separate management class, and transferability of shares.
In 1940, Paton and Littleton produced the first definitive statement on the concepts of capital
and profit.
The normative period of the 1960s saw a number of challenges to the historical principle
valuation and hence capital maintenance. This era is the forerunner of the „fair value‟
approach to derivied accounting measurement.
Consequently, we were left with a number of accounting measurement systems. These different
perspectives reflects various boundaries of accounting and lack of agreement on measurement
principles, but with the historical cost allocation system as the conventional and dominant model.
This has resulted in two notable developments in international accounting standards such as IAS
39/AASB 139 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement and the IASB/FASB joint
project on reporting financial performance – (1) that profit measurement and revenue recognition
should be linked to timely recognition, and (2) that the „fair value‟ approach should be adopted
as a working measurement principle.