\documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}\makeatletter \IfFileExists{xcolor.sty}% {\RequirePackage{xcolor}}% {\RequirePackage{color}} \usepackage{colortbl} \usepackage{wrapfig} \usepackage{ifxetex} \ifxetex \usepackage{fontspec} \usepackage{xunicode} \catcode`⃥=\active \def⃥{\textbackslash} \catcode`❴=\active \def❴{\{} \catcode`❵=\active \def❵{\}} \def\textJapanese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK JP}} \def\textChinese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK SC}} \def\textKorean{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK KR}} \setmonofont{DejaVu Sans Mono} \else \IfFileExists{utf8x.def}% {\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc} \PrerenderUnicode{–} }% {\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}} \usepackage[english]{babel} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} \usepackage{float} \usepackage[]{ucs} \uc@dclc{8421}{default}{\textbackslash } \uc@dclc{10100}{default}{\{} \uc@dclc{10101}{default}{\}} \uc@dclc{8491}{default}{\AA{}} \uc@dclc{8239}{default}{\,} \uc@dclc{20154}{default}{ } \uc@dclc{10148}{default}{>} \def\textschwa{\rotatebox{-90}{e}} \def\textJapanese{} \def\textChinese{} \IfFileExists{tipa.sty}{\usepackage{tipa}}{} \fi \def\exampleFont{\ttfamily\small} \DeclareTextSymbol{\textpi}{OML}{25} \usepackage{relsize} \RequirePackage{array} \def\@testpach{\@chclass \ifnum \@lastchclass=6 \@ne \@chnum \@ne \else \ifnum \@lastchclass=7 5 \else \ifnum \@lastchclass=8 \tw@ \else \ifnum \@lastchclass=9 \thr@@ \else \z@ \ifnum \@lastchclass = 10 \else \edef\@nextchar{\expandafter\string\@nextchar}% \@chnum \if \@nextchar c\z@ \else \if \@nextchar l\@ne \else \if \@nextchar r\tw@ \else \z@ \@chclass \if\@nextchar |\@ne \else \if \@nextchar !6 \else \if \@nextchar @7 \else \if \@nextchar (8 \else \if \@nextchar )9 \else 10 \@chnum \if \@nextchar m\thr@@\else \if \@nextchar p4 \else \if \@nextchar b5 \else \z@ \@chclass \z@ \@preamerr \z@ \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi} \gdef\arraybackslash{\let\\=\@arraycr} \def\@textsubscript#1{{\m@th\ensuremath{_{\mbox{\fontsize\sf@size\z@#1}}}}} \def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}} \def\abbr{} \def\corr{} \def\expan{} \def\gap{} \def\orig{} \def\reg{} \def\ref{} \def\sic{} \def\persName{}\def\name{} \def\placeName{} \def\orgName{} \def\textcal#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Calligraphy}#1}} \def\textgothic#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Blackletter}#1}} \def\textlarge#1{{\large #1}} \def\textoverbar#1{\ensuremath{\overline{#1}}} \def\textquoted#1{‘#1’} \def\textsmall#1{{\small #1}} \def\textsubscript#1{\@textsubscript{\selectfont#1}} \def\textxi{\ensuremath{\xi}} \def\titlem{\itshape} \newenvironment{biblfree}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{bibl}{}{} \newenvironment{byline}{\vskip6pt\itshape\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont}{\par } \newenvironment{citbibl}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{docAuthor}{\ifvmode\vskip4pt\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont\fi\itshape}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{docDate}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{docImprint}{\vskip 6pt}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{docTitle}{\vskip6pt\bfseries\fontsize{22pt}{25pt}\selectfont}{\par } \newenvironment{msHead}{\vskip 6pt}{\par} \newenvironment{msItem}{\vskip 6pt}{\par} \newenvironment{rubric}{}{} \newenvironment{titlePart}{}{\par } \newcolumntype{L}[1]{){\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{#1}} \newcolumntype{C}[1]{){\centering\arraybackslash}p{#1}} \newcolumntype{R}[1]{){\raggedleft\arraybackslash}p{#1}} \newcolumntype{P}[1]{){\arraybackslash}p{#1}} \newcolumntype{B}[1]{){\arraybackslash}b{#1}} \newcolumntype{M}[1]{){\arraybackslash}m{#1}} \definecolor{label}{gray}{0.75} \def\unusedattribute#1{\sout{\textcolor{label}{#1}}} \DeclareRobustCommand*{\xref}{\hyper@normalise\xref@} \def\xref@#1#2{\hyper@linkurl{#2}{#1}} \begingroup \catcode`\_=\active \gdef_#1{\ensuremath{\sb{\mathrm{#1}}}} \endgroup \mathcode`\_=\string"8000 \catcode`\_=12\relax \usepackage[a4paper,twoside,lmargin=1in,rmargin=1in,tmargin=1in,bmargin=1in,marginparwidth=0.75in]{geometry} \usepackage{framed} \definecolor{shadecolor}{gray}{0.95} \usepackage{longtable} \usepackage[normalem]{ulem} \usepackage{fancyvrb} \usepackage{fancyhdr} \usepackage{graphicx} \usepackage{marginnote} \renewcommand{\@cite}[1]{#1} \renewcommand*{\marginfont}{\itshape\footnotesize} \def\Gin@extensions{.pdf,.png,.jpg,.mps,.tif} \pagestyle{fancy} \usepackage[pdftitle={Quality of Disclosure of Islamic Banks in Bangladesh: Evidence from a Survey}, pdfauthor={}]{hyperref} \hyperbaseurl{} \paperwidth210mm \paperheight297mm \def\@pnumwidth{1.55em} \def\@tocrmarg {2.55em} \def\@dotsep{4.5} \setcounter{tocdepth}{3} \clubpenalty=8000 \emergencystretch 3em \hbadness=4000 \hyphenpenalty=400 \pretolerance=750 \tolerance=2000 \vbadness=4000 \widowpenalty=10000 \renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}% {-1.75ex \@plus -0.5ex \@minus -.2ex}% {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}% {\reset@font\Large\bfseries}} \renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}% {-1.75ex\@plus -0.5ex \@minus- .2ex}% {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}% {\reset@font\Large}} \renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}% {-1.5ex\@plus -0.35ex \@minus -.2ex}% {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}% {\reset@font\large}} \renewcommand\paragraph{\@startsection{paragraph}{4}{\z@}% {-1ex \@plus-0.35ex \@minus -0.2ex}% {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}% {\reset@font\normalsize}} \renewcommand\subparagraph{\@startsection{subparagraph}{5}{\parindent}% {1.5ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}% {-1em}% {\reset@font\normalsize\bfseries}} \def\l@section#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty} \addvspace{1.0em plus 1pt} \@tempdima 1.5em \begingroup \parindent \z@ \rightskip \@pnumwidth \parfillskip -\@pnumwidth \bfseries \leavevmode #1\hfil \hbox to\@pnumwidth{\hss #2}\par \endgroup} \def\l@subsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{1.5em}{2.3em}} \def\l@subsubsection{\@dottedtocline{3}{3.8em}{3.2em}} \def\l@paragraph{\@dottedtocline{4}{7.0em}{4.1em}} \def\l@subparagraph{\@dottedtocline{5}{10em}{5em}} \@ifundefined{c@section}{\newcounter{section}}{} \@ifundefined{c@chapter}{\newcounter{chapter}}{} \newif\if@mainmatter \@mainmattertrue \def\chaptername{Chapter} \def\frontmatter{% \pagenumbering{roman} \def\thechapter{\@roman\c@chapter} \def\theHchapter{\roman{chapter}} \def\thesection{\@roman\c@section} \def\theHsection{\roman{section}} \def\@chapapp{}% } \def\mainmatter{% \cleardoublepage \def\thechapter{\@arabic\c@chapter} \setcounter{chapter}{0} \setcounter{section}{0} \pagenumbering{arabic} \setcounter{secnumdepth}{6} \def\@chapapp{\chaptername}% \def\theHchapter{\arabic{chapter}} \def\thesection{\@arabic\c@section} \def\theHsection{\arabic{section}} } \def\backmatter{% \cleardoublepage \setcounter{chapter}{0} \setcounter{section}{0} \setcounter{secnumdepth}{2} \def\@chapapp{\appendixname}% \def\thechapter{\@Alph\c@chapter} \def\theHchapter{\Alph{chapter}} \appendix } \newenvironment{bibitemlist}[1]{% \list{\@biblabel{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}% {\settowidth\labelwidth{\@biblabel{#1}}% \leftmargin\labelwidth \advance\leftmargin\labelsep \@openbib@code \usecounter{enumiv}% \let\p@enumiv\@empty \renewcommand\theenumiv{\@arabic\c@enumiv}% }% \sloppy \clubpenalty4000 \@clubpenalty \clubpenalty \widowpenalty4000% \sfcode`\.\@m}% {\def\@noitemerr {\@latex@warning{Empty `bibitemlist' environment}}% \endlist} \def\tableofcontents{\section*{\contentsname}\@starttoc{toc}} \parskip0pt \parindent1em \def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}} \newenvironment{reflist}{% \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{} {% \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}% \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}% \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}% \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}% \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}% \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}% \def\makelabel##1{\itshape ##1}}% } {\end{list}\end{raggedright}} \newenvironment{sansreflist}{% \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{} {% \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}% \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}% \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}% \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}% \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}% \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}% \def\makelabel##1{\upshape ##1}}% } {\end{list}\end{raggedright}} \newenvironment{specHead}[2]% {\vspace{20pt}\hrule\vspace{10pt}% \phantomsection\label{#1}\markright{#2}% \pdfbookmark[2]{#2}{#1}% \hspace{-0.75in}{\bfseries\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont#2}% }{} \def\TheFullDate{2013-01-15 (revised: 15 January 2013)} \def\TheID{\makeatother } \def\TheDate{2013-01-15} \title{Quality of Disclosure of Islamic Banks in Bangladesh: Evidence from a Survey} \author{}\makeatletter \makeatletter \newcommand*{\cleartoleftpage}{% \clearpage \if@twoside \ifodd\c@page \hbox{}\newpage \if@twocolumn \hbox{}\newpage \fi \fi \fi } \makeatother \makeatletter \thispagestyle{empty} \markright{\@title}\markboth{\@title}{\@author} \renewcommand\small{\@setfontsize\small{9pt}{11pt}\abovedisplayskip 8.5\p@ plus3\p@ minus4\p@ \belowdisplayskip \abovedisplayskip \abovedisplayshortskip \z@ plus2\p@ \belowdisplayshortskip 4\p@ plus2\p@ minus2\p@ \def\@listi{\leftmargin\leftmargini \topsep 2\p@ plus1\p@ minus1\p@ \parsep 2\p@ plus\p@ minus\p@ \itemsep 1pt} } \makeatother \fvset{frame=single,numberblanklines=false,xleftmargin=5mm,xrightmargin=5mm} \fancyhf{} \setlength{\headheight}{14pt} \fancyhead[LE]{\bfseries\leftmark} \fancyhead[RO]{\bfseries\rightmark} \fancyfoot[RO]{} \fancyfoot[CO]{\thepage} \fancyfoot[LO]{\TheID} \fancyfoot[LE]{} \fancyfoot[CE]{\thepage} \fancyfoot[RE]{\TheID} \hypersetup{citebordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,linkbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,urlbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,bookmarksnumbered=true} \fancypagestyle{plain}{\fancyhead{}\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}} \date{} \usepackage{authblk} \providecommand{\keywords}[1] { \footnotesize \textbf{\textit{Index terms---}} #1 } \usepackage{graphicx,xcolor} \definecolor{GJBlue}{HTML}{273B81} \definecolor{GJLightBlue}{HTML}{0A9DD9} \definecolor{GJMediumGrey}{HTML}{6D6E70} \definecolor{GJLightGrey}{HTML}{929497} \renewenvironment{abstract}{% \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}\raggedright \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}} \vskip16pt \textcolor{GJBlue}{\large\bfseries\abstractname\space} }{% \vskip8pt \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}} \vskip16pt } \usepackage[absolute,overlay]{textpos} \makeatother \usepackage{lineno} \linenumbers \begin{document} \author[1]{Md. Hafij Ullah} \affil[1]{ International Islamic University Chittagong} \renewcommand\Authands{ and } \date{\small \em Received: 12 December 2012 Accepted: 1 January 2013 Published: 15 January 2013} \maketitle \begin{abstract} Accounting and financial reports of the corporations are primarily prepared for the external users of the information and therefore such reports should be designed, in form and content, according to the needs of the external users. Hence the perceptions of the users of accounting information regarding various aspects of the reports are to be assessed frequently to improve the quality of accounting information of the public limited companies. The present study is an attempt to justify the qualitative characteristics of accounting infor-mation of Islamic banks in Bangladesh on the basis of the opinion of the users of that information; to test whether there is any significant difference in opinion of them in this regard and to identify whether there is any problem of quality in accounting information provided by Islamic banks in Bangladesh. \end{abstract} \keywords{qualitative characteristics, accounting infor-mation, disclosure, islamic bank, bangladesh.} \begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1cm,1cm) % {block width} (coords) \textcolor{GJBlue}{\LARGE Global Journals \LaTeX\ JournalKaleidoscope\texttrademark} \end{textblock*} \begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1.4cm,1.5cm) % {block width} (coords) \textcolor{GJBlue}{\footnotesize \\ Artificial Intelligence formulated this projection for compatibility purposes from the original article published at Global Journals. However, this technology is currently in beta. \emph{Therefore, kindly ignore odd layouts, missed formulae, text, tables, or figures.}} \end{textblock*} \let\tabcellsep& \section[{Introduction}]{Introduction}\par uality may be defined as 'minimum standards designed to ensure satisfaction from a product or service' {\ref (Black, 2002)}. {\ref Hanson (2007)} defined quality as 'a measure of conformance of a product or service to certain specifications of standards.' Following these definitions, quality disclosure is conceptualized as disclosure practices that meet 'the minimum standards of financial reporting set by regulatory bodies and regulations for the benefit of relevant accounting information to stakeholders {\ref (Iyoha, F.O., 2011)}.' Following this conceptualization, quality of disclosure practice is decomposed into a disclosure practice that demonstrates relevance, reliability and comparability. According to {\ref Hanson (2007)}, relevance, reliability and comparability are qualities associated with information that is 'timely, useful, verifiable, and neutral, has predictive value and makes a difference to a decision maker. {\ref '} The quality of disclosure practice is essential to the needs of users who require quality accounting information for investment and other decision making purposes {\ref (Iyoha, F.O., 2011)}. Accounting information is regarded as useful when it faithfully represents the 'economic situation' of an organization in terms of relevance, reliability and comparability {\ref (Spiceland, Sepe and Tomassini, 2001)}. Useful accounting information which derives from qualitative financial statements, help in efficient allocation of resources by reducing dissemination of asymmetric information and improving pricing of securities {\ref (Chambers and} {\ref Penman, 1984, and} {\ref Ahmed, 2003)}. In an environment of quality disclosure practice, there are no deferral of loss recognition, extra reserves are not created and volatility in income is not smoothed away to create an artificial and misleading picture of balanced and consistent growth. Therefore, high-quality accounting practice should produce financial statements that report events timely and faithfully in the period in which they occur {\ref (Iyoha, F.O., 2011)}.\par The present study is an endeavor to evaluate the qualitative characteristics of accounting information provided by Islamic banks in Bangladesh. For this purpose, next section discusses the objectives of the study followed by methodology of the study. Then relevant literatures are presented followed by the qualitative characteristics of accounting information and then the analyses of the perceptions of the respondents were discussed. Finally, the study is concluded giving the summery of the findings of the detail analyses. Q ssional accountants, 30 accounting professors, 30 bank II. \section[{Objectives of the Study}]{Objectives of the Study}\par The main objective of the study is to evaluate the quality of accounting information of the Islamic banks in Bangladesh. To achieve the main objective, the specific objectives were setout as below: i. To know about the qualitative characteristics of accounting information, in general. ii. To evaluate the quality of the information provided by Islamic banks in Bangladesh. iii. To test whether there is significance difference of opinion of different respondent groups regarding quality of accounting information of the sample banks. iv. To identify whether there is any problems of quality in accounting information of the Islamic banks in Bangladesh.\par III. \section[{Methodology of the Study}]{Methodology of the Study}\par The study is mainly based on primary data, that is, opinion survey of the different respondent groups who use the information of Islamic banks in making decision. Secondary data were also used for relevant literature review. \section[{a) uestionnaire urvey}]{a) uestionnaire urvey}\par The questionnaire survey of the study includes a target sample of 150 in total consisting of 30 profe-S Q per thumb rule, for each question there should have 5 samples for which reason 150 sample were being taken here for about 30 questions. The survey was conducted during the months February through June of 2012. From Table \hyperref[tab_0]{1}, we observe the size of target sample and rate of collection from the different groups of the respondents. The achievement of target is highest in case of bank executives that is 100\%, the second highest collection is from investors that is 96.67\% and lowest achievement of target was in case of professional accountants that is only 63.33\%. The overall achievement of target of collecting questionnaire was 80.67\% and this is good in compare to that of other similar studies. The percentage (\%) of the sample shows that percentage of the bank executive category is the highest that is 24.79\% compared with the other four categories. The second highest category in the sample is investor of 23.97\% and the lowest percentage is in case of professional accountants of 15.70\% among all the category of the respondents. The achievement of target of collection of questionnaire is above the rate mentioned by {\ref Ahmed, A.A., (2009)}, Ali, {\ref Khan, Fatima and Masud (2008)} and {\ref Moser and Kalton (1971)} as being sufficient for a study leading to policy making. \section[{b) Data Analysis}]{b) Data Analysis}\par The collected data were analyzed using SPSS software version 17.0 and statistical technique ?2 test is used to justify whether there is any significant difference of opinion of the respondents regarding the qualitative characteristics of the information of the Islamic banks in Bangladesh.\par Accounting and financial reports of the corporations are primarily prepared for the external users of the information and therefore such reports should be designed, in form and content, according to the needs of the external users {\ref (Radebough, and Gray, 1993)}. Hence, the perceptions of the users of accounting information regarding various aspects of the reports are to be assessed frequently to improve the quality of the accounting and reporting practices of the public companies {\ref (Epstein, 1975)}. Iyoha, F.O., (2011) conducted a study on 61 Nigerian industries including 17 banking, 16 insurance, 5 conglomerates, 9 petroleum marketing, 3 agriculture, 7 food/beverage and 4 health industries for evaluation of the quality of accounting practice for which he collected opinion from a total of 154 respondents consisting 43 compilers and 111 users of information. Iyoha, F.O., (2011) found that there is a significant difference in the quality of accounting practice among industrial sectors in Nigeria in terms of relevance and reliability. In terms of relevance which deals with timeliness of financial reporting, the banking sector was found to be more compliant than other sectors in the Nigerian economy. In terms of reliability of accounting practice, the banking sector was found to be less transparent in financial reporting even though other industrial sectors were also involved in earnings manipulation. In a study on the pharmaceutical industries in Bangladesh, Hossain, M.S., (2010) conducted a survey on the perceptions of 140 respondents including 60 users of financial statements (investors), 48 managers of the sample companies, 8 employees of regulatory agencies, 12 professional accountants and 12 accounts preparers regarding the qualitative characteristics of the accounting information. Hossain, M.S., (2010) found that perceptions among the corporate managers, regulators and professional accountants are more or less similar and their satisfaction level is high but investors' perceptions is at low level. He found and commented that the perceptions of the sample investors vary in a significant manner from other users. {\ref Ahmed, A.A., (2009)} conducted a study on only 12 general banking companies of Bangladesh. In his study, a survey was conducted on only 61 samples consisting 9 financial analysts, 12 professional accountants, 10 stock brokers, 13 accounting professors and 17 bank loan officers were taken for evaluating the qualitative characteristics of accounting information of the sample banks. The study found that among the reasons, a majority of the respondents use financial reports for reading and academic interest and for holding or selling shares in their private capacity; annual reports provide adequate and reliable data which are comparable, readable as well as relevant. But the respondents were different in opinion regarding compliance of IAS by the banking companies in Bangladesh. In another study by Ali, aspects of Bangladeshi annual corporate financial reports. They evaluate the opinions of 25 individual investors and found firstly, that British American Tobacco (BAT) Bangladesh Co. Ltd. makes very poor disclosures on corporate governance on a voluntary basis and secondly, the users of annual reports are in favor of such disclosure. They also found that the disclosures were not sufficient in justifying the goal of corporate governance. In a study in Jordan, {\ref Abu-Nasser and Rutherford (1996)} exposed the view of 224 external users including individual shareholders, institutional shareholders, bank loan officers, stock brokers and academics of corporate reports. In terms of the usage of the annual report, {\ref Abu-Nasser and Rutherford (1996)} found bank loan officers to be the heaviest users of the annual reports in Jordan while individual shareholders and the academics were found to be the least. They also found that the income statement and balance sheet to be the most widely read parts of the annual corporate reports by all groups of the users. They found that though the annual reports are the most important source of information to all users but the users are poorly satisfied over the qualitative characteristics of the information. {\ref Anderson and Epstein (1995)} conducted another study on Australian individual investors for evaluating the usage of annual corporate reports. They found that Australian investors use corporate annual reports as third important basis of making investment decision after stock brokers' advice and financial newspapers and magazines. They found that investors perceive income statement to be more useful than directors' report but investors read directors' reports more thoroughly than income statement and investors want more explained and simplified information and more information regarding pending litigation, unasserted claims, management audit and information on change of auditor in annual reports. In that study the authors did not statistically determine whether the difference between the pattern of readership of annual reports' sections and the perceived usefulness of such sections of any significance in the Australian environment. Recognizing the needs for research in this area {\ref Anderson (1981)} conducted a study on 188 institutional investors in Australia to justify the importance of annual reports in making investment decision. He found that Australian institutional investors depend mostly on annual reports for making investment decision followed by visits to the companies. Institutional investors mostly read balance sheet, profit and loss account, notes to the accounts and chairman's statement respectively. The study found that the institutional investors want more information regarding company's product, current value of long term assets and remuneration of the directors in annual reports. But the study did not statistically justify whether there is any significance difference between actual and perceived importance of using annual reports. {\ref Baker and Halsem (1973)} performed a one of the pioneering studies in this area regarding identification of information needs and sources of such information of the individual investors. The study found that most of the individual investors rely heavily on stock brokers' advice as the main source of information regarding companies for making investment decision but only 8\% of them use financial statement for this purpose. The authors also found that the individual investors gives emphasis on getting information regarding the future expectations of the company but less importance on the dividend performance.\par The SFAC No. 2 of the FASB examined the characteristics that make accounting information useful. These characteristics are stated below (Porwal, 2010):a) Understandability\par It is the quality of information that permits reasonably informed users to perceive its significance, i.e. to understand the content and significance of financial statements and reports. \section[{b) Relevance}]{b) Relevance}\par Relevant information is crucial in making the correct investment decision. Accounting information has relevance if it makes a difference in a decision. \section[{c) Predictive Value}]{c) Predictive Value}\par The quality of information that helps users to increase the likelihood of correctly forecasting the outcome of past or present events. \section[{d) Feedback Value}]{d) Feedback Value}\par The quality of information that enables users to confirm or correct prior expectations. \section[{e) Timeliness}]{e) Timeliness}\par Having information available to decision maker before it loses its capacity to influence decisions. Source : Financial Accounting Standards Board {\ref (1980)} Graph 1 : Showing the hierarchy of qualitative characteristics of accounting information f) Reliability\par Information is reliable if it is free from error and bias, and faithfully represents what it purports to represent. If the information is not reliable, then no investor can rely on it to make an investment decision. \section[{g) Verifiability}]{g) Verifiability}\par The ability through consensus among measurers to ensure that information represents what it purports to represent or that the chosen method of measurement has been used without error or bias. \section[{h) Neutrality}]{h) Neutrality}\par It is absence in reported information of bias intended to attain a predetermined result or to induce a particular mode of behavior. The information should not favor one set of interest over others. \section[{i) Representational Faithfulness}]{i) Representational Faithfulness}\par Correspondence or agreement between a measure or description and the phenomenon that it purports to represent. From the accounting point of view, it is correspondence between the accounting figures and descriptions and the resources or events that these figures and descriptions represent. \section[{j) Comparability}]{j) Comparability}\par The quality of information that enables users to identify similarities in and differences between two sets of economic phenomena. \section[{k) Consistency}]{k) Consistency}\par Consistency means conformity from period to period with unchanging policies and procedures. Accounting changes hinder the comparison of operation results between periods as the accounting used to measure those results differ. \section[{a) Educational Qualifications of the Respondents}]{a) Educational Qualifications of the Respondents}\par The highest level of educational qualifications of the respondents is stated in the To identify the working experience of the respondents, few options of range of working experience varying from less than 5 years to more than 20 years were provided in the questionnaire. The results tabulated in the Table \hyperref[tab_4]{5} reveals that 38.0\% of the respondents have less than 5 years of working experience, 31.4\% have experience of 5-10 years, 15.7\% of them have experience of 10-15 years, about 10\% of them have experience of 15-20 years and finally only 5\% of them have more than 20 years of experience in their respective area. Users of accounting information use financial accounting reports for a number of reasons. In the questionnaire of the study, the respondents were asked to identify the purpose of using Islamic banking reports. The results of the opinion survey in this regard are as given below: As per the opinion of the respondents stated in Table \hyperref[tab_6]{7}, the highest number (that is 33.1\%) of them use Islamic banking reports to decide buying, holding or selling shares personally followed by making decisions on behalf of clients or employer (19.8\%) and reading and academic interest (17.4\%). More specifically 57.9\% of the professional accountants use Islamic banking reports for making decisions on behalf of clients or employer; 85.7\% of the accounting professor use for reading and academic interest; 45.5\% of the stock brokers use for advising their clients and 96.6\% of the investors use for making decision to decide buying, holding or selling shares personally. Table \hyperref[tab_8]{8} reveals that 36.4\% of the respondent mostly read ratios and future projections part of Islamic banking reports and a similar percentage of 21.5\% and 19.8\% of them mostly read income statement and balance sheet respectively and only 12.4\% of the respondents mostly read notes to the accounts for making decision. Among the professional accountants 42.1\% emphasized on notes to the accounts and 33.3\% of the accounting professors on balance sheet but maximum bank executives, stock brokers and investors emphasized on ratios and future projections.\par In order to test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows:\par H 0 1 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding mostly read part of the Islamic banking reports.\par The ?2 value obtained using SPSS software is 35.715 at .017 level of significance and hence the null hypothesis is rejected which means that there is significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding mostly read part of the Islamic banking reports. \section[{h) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Comparative}]{h) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Comparative}\par Reliability of the Islamic Banking Information\par The respondents were asked whether the information provided by conventional banks is comparatively more reliable than that of Islamic banks. The results of the opinion of the respondents in this regard are stated in Table \hyperref[tab_9]{9}: An annual report contains a number of parts and different parts provide different types and nature of information of difference importance. The respondents them opined that the information provided by conventional banks are more reliable than that of Islamic banks.\par To test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 2 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding comparative reliability of the information provided by Islamic banks and conventional banks.\par The ?2 value obtained using SPSS software is 5.959 at .202 level of significance and hence the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding comparative reliability of the information provided by Islamic banks and conventional banks in Bangladesh. i) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Compliance of BAS, BFRS, Companies Act, Banking Companies Act and SEC rules, etc.\par Compliance of BAS, BFRS, Companies Act, Banking Companies Act and SEC rules, etc. is mandatory to be followed in accounting and reporting by the organizations. The respondents were asked regarding compliance of these standards/rules by the Islamic banks. The results of the opinion of the respondents in this regard are tabulated in Table \hyperref[tab_10]{10}: Table \hyperref[tab_10]{10} shows that only 11.60\% of the respondents under study either neutral or disagree in case of compliance of IAS/BAS, IFRS/BFRS, Companies Act, Banking Companies Act, and SEC Rules, etc. by Islamic banks in Bangladesh but 88.40\% of them agreed in this regard out of which 33.90 respondents agreed strongly.\par In order to test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 3 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding compliance of IAS/BAS, IFRS/BFRS, Companies Act, Banking Companies Act, and SEC Rules, etc. The ?2 value obtained using SPSS software is 19.592 at .075 level of significance and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding compliance of IAS/BAS, IFRS/BFRS, Companies Act, Banking Companies Act, and SEC Rules, etc.\par From the Table \hyperref[tab_9]{9} it is observed that 80.20\% of the respondents think that there is no difference in comparative reliability of the information provided by Islamic banks and conventional banks but 19.80\% of the j) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Compliance of AAOIFI Financial Accounting Standards AAOIFI developed some financial accounting standards that are needed to be followed in case of accounting and reporting by Islamic organizations. The respondents were asked regarding compliance of AAOIFI financial accounting standards by the Islamic banks. The results of the opinion of the respondents in this regard are tabulated in It is observed from the Table 11 that 6.6\% respondents disagreed and 24.8\% opined neutral in case of complying AAOIFI standards by Islamic banks in Bangladesh. On the other hand 16.5\% of them strongly agreed and 52.1\% simply agreed in this regard.\par To test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 4 : There is no significance difference among the The ?2 value obtained using SPSS software is 31.358 at .002 level of significance and therefore the null hypothesis is rejected which means that there is significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding compliance of AAOIFI financial accounting standards by Islamic banks in Bangladesh. The reason may be of having no or poor idea regarding AAOIFI by the respondents other than bank executives. \section[{k) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Adequacy of Disclosure by Islamic Banks}]{k) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Adequacy of Disclosure by Islamic Banks}\par Decision makers always beg for information without which accurate decision making is almost impossible. Hence, companies should disclose adequate information in their reports so that the users can find all necessary information for making decision. The results of the responses regarding whether Islamic banks disclose adequate information in the annual reports or not are presented in the following table: Quality of Disclosure of Islamic Banks in Bangladesh: Evidence from A Survey respondents expect more disclosure of information in the annual reports of Islamic banks.\par To test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 5 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding adequacy of disclosure by Islamic banks in Bangladesh.\par The ?2 value obtained using SPSS software is 13.066 at .364 level of significance and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding adequacy of disclosure by Islamic banks in Bangladesh. \section[{l) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Effectiveness of the Information of the Islamic Banks}]{l) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Effectiveness of the Information of the Islamic Banks}\par The results of the opinion of the respondents regarding effectiveness of the information provided by Islamic banks in their annual reports are as presented below in Table \hyperref[tab_15]{13}: From the above Table, it can be observed that 24\% of the respondents under study either neutral or disagreed regarding the effectiveness of the information provided by Islamic banks but 76\% of them either strongly agreed or agreed that the information is effective in making decision.\par In order to test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 6 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding effectiveness of the information of Islamic banks.\par Using SPSS software the obtained value of ?2 is 18.833 at .093 level of significance and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding the effectiveness of the information provided by Islamic banks in Bangladesh. \section[{m) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Usefulness of the Information of the Islamic Banks}]{m) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Usefulness of the Information of the Islamic Banks}\par The results of the responses of the respondents regarding usefulness of the information provided by Islamic banks in their annual reports are as presented below in Table \hyperref[tab_18]{14} From the above table, it is seen that 19.8\% respondents strongly agreed and 62.0\% merely agreed that the information of Islamic banks are useful in making decision but 12.4\% responded neutral and 5.8\% disagreed in this regard.\par To test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 7 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding usefulness of the information of Islamic banks.\par Using SPSS software the obtained value of ?2 is 12.544 at .403 level of significance and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding the usefulness of the information provided by Islamic banks in Bangladesh. \section[{n) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Understandability of the Information of the Islamic Banks}]{n) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Understandability of the Information of the Islamic Banks}\par The results of the opinion of the respondents regarding understandability of the information provided by Islamic banks in their annual reports are stated in Table \hyperref[tab_17]{15}: Table \hyperref[tab_17]{15} shows that 19.0\% strongly agreed and 55.4\% agreed that the information provided by Islamic banks in their annual reports is understandable. On the other hand, 19.0\% responded neutrally and 6.6\% of them disagreed in this point.\par In order to test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 8 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding understandability of the information of Islamic banks. From the Table \hyperref[tab_20]{16}, we observe that 2.5\% of the respondents disagreed and 18.2\% responded neutrally in case of relevancy of the information of the Islamic banks in Bangladesh but 60.3\% of them agreed and 19.0\% strongly agreed in this case.\par To test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 9 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding relevancy of the information of Islamic banks.\par We obtained value of ?2 is 18.481 at .102 level of significance using SPSS software and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding the relevancy of the information provided by Islamic banks. \section[{p) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Predictive}]{p) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Predictive}\par Value of the Information of the Islamic Banks\par The results of the opinion of the respondents regarding predictive value of the information provided by Islamic banks in their annual reports are tabulated in Table \hyperref[tab_19]{17}: The respondents were asked regarding relevancy of the information of the Islamic banks. The results of the responses of the respondents regarding relevancy of the information provided by Islamic banks in their annual reports are stated in Table \hyperref[tab_20]{16}:\par We obtained value of ?2 is 20.414 at .060 level of significance using SPSS software and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding the understandability of the information provided by Islamic banks in Bangladesh. From the above table, it can be observed that 7.4\% of the respondents under study disagreed and 29.8\% opined neutral position regarding feedback value of the information provided in annual reports of the Islamic banks but 5.8\% of them strongly agreed and 57.0\% merely agreed in this point. \section[{Global}]{Global}\par In order to test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 11 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding feedback value of the information of Islamic banks.\par We obtained value of ?2 is 12.965 at .372 level of significance using SPSS software and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding the feedback value of the information provided by Islamic banks in Bangladesh. \section[{r) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Timeliness of the Information the Islamic Banks}]{r) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Timeliness of the Information the Islamic Banks}\par The results of the opinion of the respondents regarding timeliness of the information provided by Islamic banks in their annual reports are presented in Table \hyperref[tab_23]{19}: q) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Feedback\par Value of the Information of the Islamic Banks\par The respondents were asked regarding feedback value of the information of the Islamic banks. The results of the responses of the respondents regarding feedback value of the information provided by Islamic banks in their annual reports are tabulated in Table \hyperref[tab_21]{18}:\par We obtained value of ?2 is 19.408 at .079 level of significance using SPSS software and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding the predictive value of the information provided by Islamic banks in Bangladesh.\par Table \hyperref[tab_19]{17} shows that 11.6\% of the respondents under study agreed strongly and 49.6\% agreed that the information of the annual reports of the Islamic banks has predictive value. On the other hand, 28.9\% of them opined neutral and 9.9\% of them disagreed in this regard.\par In order to test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 10 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding predictive value of the information of Islamic banks.\par respondents regarding timeliness of the information provided by Islamic banks. \section[{s) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Reliability of the Information of the Islamic Banks}]{s) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Reliability of the Information of the Islamic Banks}\par The respondents were asked regarding reliability of the information of the Islamic banks. The results of the responses of the respondents regarding reliability of the information provided by Islamic banks in their annual reports are tabulated in Table \hyperref[tab_22]{20}: From the above table, it can be observed that 20.6\% of the respondents either neutral or disagreed in case of giving opinion regarding the reliability of the information provided by Islamic banks but 28.9\% strongly agreed and 50.4\% of them merely agreed in this point.\par In order to test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 13 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding reliability of the information of Islamic banks.\par Table \hyperref[tab_23]{19} reveals that 37.2\% of the respondents strongly and 54.5\% merely opined that Islamic banks provide information timely but only 8.3\% of them either neutral or disagree in this case.\par To test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 12 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding timeliness of the information of Islamic banks.\par Using SPSS software the obtained value of ?2 is 19.582 at .075 level of significance and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the Table \hyperref[tab_25]{21} shows that 18.2\% of the respondents strongly agreed and 54.5\% agreed that the information provided by Islamic banks in their annual reports is verifiable but 16.5\% of them are neutral and 10.7\% of them disagreed in this case.\par To test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 14 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding verifiability of the information of Islamic banks.\par Using SPSS software the obtained value of ?2 is 18.163 at .111 level of significance and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding verifiability of the information provided by Islamic banks in Bangladesh. u) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Faithfulness of the Information of the Islamic Banks\par The respondents were asked regarding faithfulness of the information of the Islamic banks. The results of the responses of the respondents regarding faithfulness of the information provided by Islamic banks in their annual reports are tabulated in Table \hyperref[tab_24]{22}: The respondents were asked regarding the verifiability of the information provided by the Islamic banks. The results of the opinion of the respondents in this regard are presented in Table \hyperref[tab_25]{21:} Using SPSS software the obtained value of ?2 is 19.372 at .080 level of significance and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding reliability of the information provided by Islamic banks in Bangladesh. Table \hyperref[tab_3]{23} reveals that out of the respondents under study 17.4\% strongly agreed and 51.2\% merely agreed that the information of the Islamic banks is neutral but 22.3\% of them opined neutral and 9.1\% disagreed in this regard. \section[{Global}]{Global}\par To test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 16 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding neutrality of the information of Islamic banks.\par We obtained value of ?2 is 18.525 at .101 level of significance using SPSS software and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding the neutrality of the information provided by Islamic banks. The results of the opinion of the respondents regarding neutrality of the information provided by Islamic banks in their annual reports are stated in Table \hyperref[tab_3]{23}:\par We obtained value of ?2 is 19.106 at .086 level of significance using SPSS software and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding the faithfulness of the information provided by Islamic banks in Bangladesh.\par From the Table \hyperref[tab_24]{22}, it is seen that 24.8\% of the respondents strongly agreed and 56.2\% simply agreed that the information of Islamic banks is faithful. But 20\% of the respondents opined either neutral or disagree in case of faithfulness of the information.\par In order to test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 15 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding faithfulness of the information of Islamic banks. It can be observed from the Table 25 that 15.7\% of the respondents strongly agreed and 62.8\% of them merely agreed that Islamic banks provide consistence information in their annual reports but 6.6\% of them disagreed and 14.9\% opined neutral in this case.\par In order to test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: We obtained value of ?2 is 15.318 at .225 level of significance using SPSS software and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding the effectiveness of accounting information systems of the Islamic banks in Bangladesh. Quality of information also depends on the quality of audit firms and compliance of rules regarding their appointment. The respondents were asked regarding compliance of rules regarding appointment of auditors of the Islamic banks. The results of the responses of the respondents in this regard are tabulated in Table \hyperref[tab_6]{27:} Table \hyperref[tab_29]{26} shows that 27.3\% of the respondents surveyed opined neutral and 3.3\% of them disagreed regarding the effectiveness of accounting information systems of the Islamic banks. On the other hand 52.9\% of them simply and 16.5\% strongly agreed in this regard.\par To test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 18 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding consistency of the information of Islamic banks.\par Using SPSS software the obtained value of ?2 is 17.691 at .125 level of significance and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding consistency of the information provided by Islamic banks. y) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Effectiveness of Accounting Information Systems of the Islamic Banks\par The respondents were asked regarding effectiveness of accounting information systems of the Islamic banks. The results of the responses of the respondents in this regard are presented in Table \hyperref[tab_29]{26}: D To test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 21 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding quality audit of the financial reports of Islamic banks.\par We obtained value of ?2 is 18.890 at .091 level of significance using SPSS software and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding quality audit of the financial reports of the Islamic banks in Bangladesh.\par On the basis of the analysis of the perceptions of the respondents, the findings of the study may be stated as below: a) Most of the respondents think that there is no difference in comparative reliability of the information provided by Islamic banks and conventional banks but few professional accountants and stock brokers think that the information provided by conventional banks are more reliable than that of Islamic banks. b) Maximum respondents thought that in maintaining quality of disclosure, Islamic banks in Bangladesh could maintain high quality in case of timeliness, faithfulness, usefulness, relevance and reliability of information. c) In maintaining quality of disclosure, Islamic banks in Bangladesh could maintain moderate quality in case of consistency, comparability, effectiveness, understandability and verifiability of information. d) Maximum respondents thought that Islamic banks in Bangladesh could not maintain high quality of information in case of predictive value, feedback value, adequacy, neutrality and effectiveness of accounting information system. e) Islamic banks highly comply BAS, BFRS, Companies Act, banking Companies Act, SEC rules, etc. in preparing books of accounts and also comply rules of appointment of auditors and quality of audit in case of reporting of the information to its stakeholders. But the opinion of the respondents is not satisfactory and indifferent regarding complying AAOIFI financial accounting standards. f) The highest number of the respondents uses Islamic banking reports to decide buying, holding or selling shares personally followed by making decisions on behalf of clients or employer and reading and academic interest. More specifically, maximum professional accountants use Islamic banking reports for making decisions on behalf of clients or employer; maximum accounting professors use for reading and academic interest; maximum stock brokers use for advising their clients and almost all investors use for making decision to decide buying, holding or selling shares personally.\par g) Maximum of the respondents mostly read ratios and future projections part of Islamic banking reports followed by income statement and balance sheet for making decision. Specifically, maximum professional accountants emphasize on notes to the accounts and maximum accounting professors read balance sheet but maximum bank executives, stock brokers and investors emphasized on ratios and future projections.\par Quality of disclosure is a must to make accurate decision by the users of the accounting information. As per the present study, the quality of Islamic banking disclosure process and accounting information may be said to be satisfactory. As the quality has no highest limit and as there are some lack of quality in few cases, Islamic banks should try to improve the quality in those areas. \section[{VII}]{VII}\begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{}\includegraphics[]{image-2.png} \caption{\label{fig_0}}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{1} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.03388704318936877\textwidth}P{0.36146179401993356\textwidth}P{0.07059800664451828\textwidth}P{0.08471760797342193\textwidth}P{0.1496677740863787\textwidth}P{0.1496677740863787\textwidth}} Sl. No.\tabcellsep User Group\tabcellsep Target\tabcellsep No. of\tabcellsep Rate of\tabcellsep \% of the Target\\ \tabcellsep \tabcellsep Sample\tabcellsep Collections\tabcellsep Collection (\%)\tabcellsep Sample\\ 1\tabcellsep Professional Accountant (P.A.)\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 63.33\tabcellsep 15.70\\ 2\tabcellsep Accounting Professor (A.P.)\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 70.00\tabcellsep 17.36\\ 3\tabcellsep Bank Executives (B.E.)\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 100.00\tabcellsep 24.79\\ 4\tabcellsep Stock Broker (S.B.)\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 73.33\tabcellsep 18.18\\ 5\tabcellsep Investor (I.V.)\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 96.67\tabcellsep 23.97\\ \tabcellsep Total\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 121\tabcellsep 80.67\tabcellsep 100.00\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_0}Table 1 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{2} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.85\textwidth}} . As per the\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_1}Table 2}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{2} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.49223394055608816\textwidth}P{0.12387344199424737\textwidth}P{0.027708533077660594\textwidth}P{0.005704697986577181\textwidth}P{0.09534995206136146\textwidth}P{0.022818791946308724\textwidth}P{0.023633748801534037\textwidth}P{0.028523489932885907\textwidth}P{0.03015340364333653\textwidth}} Educational Qualifications\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ Bachelor\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 19\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 10.5\%\tabcellsep \tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 3.3\%\tabcellsep 22.7\%\tabcellsep 37.9\%\tabcellsep 15.7\%\\ Masters\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 17\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 15\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 17\tabcellsep 18\tabcellsep 96\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 89.5\%\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 71.4\%\tabcellsep 96.7\%\tabcellsep 77.3\%\tabcellsep 62.1\%\tabcellsep 79.3\%\\ Ph.D.\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 6\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 28.6\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 5.0\%\\ Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{100.0\%}\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\\ \multicolumn{9}{l}{N.B.: P.A.= Professional Accountant, A.P.= Accounting Professor, B.E.= Bank Executive, S.B.= Stock}\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{Broker and I.V. = Investor.}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ \multicolumn{4}{l}{b) Professional Educational Qualification of the}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{5}{l}{having professional education 23.9\% of them either}\\ Respondents\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{have CA or}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ \multicolumn{4}{l}{Professional educational qualifications require}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ \multicolumn{4}{l}{to make a person specialized in a particular field. It is}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ \multicolumn{4}{l}{better to have professional degree on accounting for}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ \multicolumn{4}{l}{better understanding and evaluation of the quality of}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ \multicolumn{4}{l}{financial accounting reports. The study reveals that}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ \multicolumn{4}{l}{60.3\% of the respondents have no or other professional}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ \multicolumn{4}{l}{educational qualifications and out of the respondents}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_2}Table 2 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{3} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.16371340523882896\textwidth}P{0.29206471494607084\textwidth}P{0.05893682588597842\textwidth}P{0.1401386748844376\textwidth}P{0.07465331278890601\textwidth}P{0.03143297380585516\textwidth}P{0.03929121725731895\textwidth}P{0.049768875192604\textwidth}} Professional Education\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ CA\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 13\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 16\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 68.4\%\tabcellsep 9.5\%\tabcellsep 3.3\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 13.2\%\\ CMA\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 9\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 26.3\%\tabcellsep 19.0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 7.4\%\\ Both CA and CMA\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 4\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep 4.8\%\tabcellsep 6.7\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 3.3\%\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{MBM/ Banking Diploma Count}\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 17\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 19\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 56.7\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 6.9\%\tabcellsep 15.7\%\\ Others or None\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 14\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 27\tabcellsep 73\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 66.7\%\tabcellsep \multicolumn{4}{l}{33.3\% 100.0\% 93.1\% 60.3\%}\\ Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep \multicolumn{5}{l}{100.0\% 100.0\% 100.0\% 100.0\% 100.0\%}\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{c) Age Distribution of the Respondents}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par {\small\itshape [Note: d) Working Experience of the Respondents]} \caption{\label{tab_3}Table 3 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{5} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.13872\textwidth}P{0.28968\textwidth}P{0.06392\textwidth}P{0.10472000000000001\textwidth}P{0.05848\textwidth}P{0.055760000000000004\textwidth}P{0.068\textwidth}P{0.07071999999999999\textwidth}} Working Experience\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ Less than 5\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 14\tabcellsep 13\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 46\\ years\tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 52.6\%\tabcellsep 19.0\%\tabcellsep 46.7\%\tabcellsep 59.1\%\tabcellsep 17.2\%\tabcellsep 38.0\%\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{5-10 years Count}\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 9\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep 38\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 26.3\%\tabcellsep 33.3\%\tabcellsep 30.0\%\tabcellsep 31.8\%\tabcellsep 34.5\%\tabcellsep 31.4\%\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{10-15 years Count}\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 8\tabcellsep 19\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 15.8\%\tabcellsep 14.3\%\tabcellsep 13.3\%\tabcellsep 4.5\%\tabcellsep 27.6\%\tabcellsep 15.7\%\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{15-20 years Count}\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 12\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep 23.8\%\tabcellsep 6.7\%\tabcellsep 4.5\%\tabcellsep 10.3\%\tabcellsep 9.9\%\\ Above 20\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 6\\ years\tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 9.5\%\tabcellsep 3.3\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 10.3\%\tabcellsep 5.0\%\\ Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\end{longtable} \par {\small\itshape [Note: e) Accounting Qualification of the Respondents Table6shows that 30.6\% of the respondents served or serving as account executives; 28.1\% of them hold accounting qualifications, that is, accounting degree like bachelor or masters in accounting; 17.4\% of them serving as accounting professor and 16.5\% of them attended appropriate courses in accounting. Rationally, 100\% professional accountants served or serving as account executive and 100\% accounting professors serving as accounting teaching position.]} \caption{\label{tab_4}Table 5 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{4} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.34492753623188405\textwidth}P{0.06159420289855073\textwidth}P{0.2402173913043478\textwidth}P{0.03695652173913043\textwidth}P{0.03695652173913043\textwidth}P{0.06159420289855073\textwidth}P{0.06775362318840579\textwidth}} Age Group\tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ Below 25 Count\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 3\\ \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 6.7\%\tabcellsep 4.5\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 2.5\%\end{longtable} \par {\small\itshape [Note: © 2013 Global Journals Inc. (US) Quality of Disclosure of Islamic Banks in Bangladesh: Evidence from A Survey]} \caption{\label{tab_5}Table 4 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{7} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.2600328947368421\textwidth}P{0.2693530701754386\textwidth}P{0.09506578947368421\textwidth}P{0.04846491228070175\textwidth}P{0.0512609649122807\textwidth}P{0.03634868421052632\textwidth}P{0.04473684210526315\textwidth}P{0.04473684210526315\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Islamic banking reports}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Purpose of using Islamic\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Banking Report\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep A. P.\tabcellsep B. E.\tabcellsep S. B.\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ For reading and academic\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 18\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 21\\ interest\tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{10.5\% 85.7\%}\tabcellsep 3.3\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 17.4\%\\ To decide buying, holding or\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 28\tabcellsep 40\\ selling shares personally\tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 10.5\%\tabcellsep 4.8\%\tabcellsep 23.3\%\tabcellsep 9.1\%\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{96.6\% 33.1\%}\\ To decide buying, holding or\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 10\\ selling shares for organization\tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep 9.5\%\tabcellsep 16.7\%\tabcellsep 9.1\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 8.3\%\\ To grant investment (Loan)\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 12\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{16.7\% 27.3\%}\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 9.9\%\\ To make decisions on behalf of\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 24\\ clients or employer\tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 57.9\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 33.3\%\tabcellsep 9.1\%\tabcellsep 3.4\%\tabcellsep 19.8\%\\ To advise clients\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 14\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 10.5\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 6.7\%\tabcellsep 45.5\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 11.6\%\\ Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep \multicolumn{6}{l}{100.0\% 100.0\% 100.0\% 100.0\% 100.0\% 100.0\%}\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_6}Table 7 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{6} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.26741573033707866\textwidth}P{0.18146067415730335\textwidth}P{0.047752808988764044\textwidth}P{0.18623595505617976\textwidth}P{0.03342696629213483\textwidth}P{0.028651685393258425\textwidth}P{0.05252808988764045\textwidth}P{0.05252808988764045\textwidth}} Accounting Qualifications\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ Worked / Working as a\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 6\\ bookkeeper\tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 13.3\%\tabcellsep 4.5\%\tabcellsep 3.4\%\tabcellsep 5.0\%\end{longtable} \par {\small\itshape [Note: Quality of Disclosure of Islamic Banks in Bangladesh: Evidence from A Survey]} \caption{\label{tab_7}Table 6 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{8} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.16174968071519794\textwidth}P{0.0021711366538952745\textwidth}P{0.0032567049808429117\textwidth}P{0.2833333333333333\textwidth}P{0.08250319284802043\textwidth}P{0.08793103448275862\textwidth}P{0.05427841634738186\textwidth}P{0.05102171136653895\textwidth}P{0.05862068965517241\textwidth}P{0.06513409961685823\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Islamic banking reports}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ \multicolumn{3}{l}{Mostly read parts of the reports}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{Balance Sheet}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 24\\ \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 15.8\%\tabcellsep 33.3\%\tabcellsep 16.7\%\tabcellsep 18.2\%\tabcellsep 17.2\%\tabcellsep 19.8\%\\ \multicolumn{4}{l}{Income Statement Count}\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 26\\ \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 21.1\%\tabcellsep 28.6\%\tabcellsep 13.3\%\tabcellsep 22.7\%\tabcellsep 24.1\%\tabcellsep 21.5\%\\ \multicolumn{3}{l}{Directors' Report}\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 10\\ \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep 9.5\%\tabcellsep 10.0\%\tabcellsep 9.1\%\tabcellsep 6.9\%\tabcellsep 8.3\%\\ Notes\tabcellsep to\tabcellsep the\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 8\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 15\\ Accounts\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 42.1\%\tabcellsep 19.0\%\tabcellsep 6.7\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 3.4\%\tabcellsep 12.4\%\\ \multicolumn{3}{l}{Ratios and Future}\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 15\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 13\tabcellsep 44\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{Projections}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 15.8\%\tabcellsep 9.5\%\tabcellsep 50.0\%\tabcellsep 50.0\%\tabcellsep 44.8\%\tabcellsep 36.4\%\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{Chairman's}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 2\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{Statement}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 3.3\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 3.4\%\tabcellsep 1.7\%\\ Total\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_8}Table 8 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{9} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.07622282608695652\textwidth}P{0.2633152173913043\textwidth}P{0.12934782608695652\textwidth}P{0.13165760869565216\textwidth}P{0.05543478260869565\textwidth}P{0.05543478260869565\textwidth}P{0.06698369565217391\textwidth}P{0.07160326086956521\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Islamic banking information}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Comparative Reliability\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ Yes\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 24\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 31.6\%\tabcellsep 9.5\%\tabcellsep 13.3\%\tabcellsep 31.8\%\tabcellsep 17.2\%\tabcellsep 19.8\%\\ No\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 13\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 26\tabcellsep 15\tabcellsep 24\tabcellsep 97\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 68.4\%\tabcellsep 90.5\%\tabcellsep 86.7\%\tabcellsep 68.2\%\tabcellsep 82.8\%\tabcellsep 80.2\%\\ Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\end{longtable} \par {\small\itshape [Note: were]} \caption{\label{tab_9}Table 9 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{10} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.18529411764705883\textwidth}P{0.2720588235294118\textwidth}P{0.06323529411764706\textwidth}P{0.08235294117647059\textwidth}P{0.061764705882352944\textwidth}P{0.061764705882352944\textwidth}P{0.060294117647058824\textwidth}P{0.06323529411764706\textwidth}} \multicolumn{2}{l}{Compliance of BAS, BFRS,}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{Companies Act, Banking Companies Act, and SEC Rules, etc.}\tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep A. P.\tabcellsep B. E.\tabcellsep S. B.\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{Strongly Agree Count}\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 16\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 41\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 26.3\%\tabcellsep 52.4\%\tabcellsep 53.3\%\tabcellsep 13.6\%\tabcellsep 20.7\%\tabcellsep 33.9\%\\ Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep 9\tabcellsep 12\tabcellsep 15\tabcellsep 20\tabcellsep 66\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 52.6\%\tabcellsep 42.9\%\tabcellsep 40.0\%\tabcellsep 68.2\%\tabcellsep 69.0\%\tabcellsep 54.5\%\\ Neutral\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 7\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 10.5\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 3.3\%\tabcellsep 13.6\%\tabcellsep 3.4\%\tabcellsep 5.8\%\\ Disagree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 7\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 10.5\%\tabcellsep 4.8\%\tabcellsep 3.3\%\tabcellsep 4.5\%\tabcellsep 6.9\%\tabcellsep 5.8\%\\ Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_10}Table 10 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{11} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.08764988009592325\textwidth}P{0.050959232613908875\textwidth}P{0.3139088729016786\textwidth}P{0.06726618705035971\textwidth}P{0.06522781774580336\textwidth}P{0.06318944844124699\textwidth}P{0.06522781774580336\textwidth}P{0.06726618705035971\textwidth}P{0.06930455635491607\textwidth}} \tabcellsep Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep 12\tabcellsep 16\tabcellsep 9\tabcellsep 16\tabcellsep 63\\ \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 52.6\%\tabcellsep 57.1\%\tabcellsep 53.3\%\tabcellsep 40.9\%\tabcellsep 55.2\%\tabcellsep 52.1\%\\ \tabcellsep Neutral\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep 30\\ Y 2013 ear\tabcellsep Disagree\tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop Count \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 21.1\% 2 10.5\%\tabcellsep 19.0\% 1 4.8\%\tabcellsep 3.3\% 1 3.3\%\tabcellsep 50.0\% 2 9.1\%\tabcellsep 34.5\% 2 6.9\%\tabcellsep 24.8\% 8 6.6\%\\ \tabcellsep Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\\ Volume XIII Issue IV Version I\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ ( )\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_11}Table 11 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{11} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.1845959595959596\textwidth}P{0.16313131313131313\textwidth}P{0.1803030303030303\textwidth}P{0.1202020202020202\textwidth}P{0.055808080808080814\textwidth}P{0.04292929292929293\textwidth}P{0.04722222222222222\textwidth}P{0.055808080808080814\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Financial Accounting Standards}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Compliance of\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ AAOIFI Standards\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep A. P.\tabcellsep B. E.\tabcellsep S. B.\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ Strongly Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 12\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 20\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 15.8\%\tabcellsep 19.0\%\tabcellsep 40.0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 3.4\%\tabcellsep 16.5\%\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_12}Table 11 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{12} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.09709737827715356\textwidth}P{0.3024344569288389\textwidth}P{0.09073033707865168\textwidth}P{0.1098314606741573\textwidth}P{0.058895131086142326\textwidth}P{0.055711610486891376\textwidth}P{0.06367041198501873\textwidth}P{0.07162921348314606\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{by Islamic banks}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Adequacy of Disclosure\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ Strongly Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 3\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 6.7\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 2.5\%\\ Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 15\tabcellsep 18\tabcellsep 15\tabcellsep 18\tabcellsep 73\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 36.8\%\tabcellsep 71.4\%\tabcellsep 60.0\%\tabcellsep 68.2\%\tabcellsep 62.1\%\tabcellsep 60.3\%\\ Neutral\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 9\tabcellsep 32\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 31.6\%\tabcellsep 23.8\%\tabcellsep 23.3\%\tabcellsep 22.7\%\tabcellsep 31.0\%\tabcellsep 26.4\%\\ Disagree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 13\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 26.3\%\tabcellsep 4.8\%\tabcellsep 10.0\%\tabcellsep 9.1\%\tabcellsep 6.9\%\tabcellsep 10.7\%\\ Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_13}Table 12 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{12} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.3855960264900662\textwidth}P{0.4644039735099338\textwidth}} reveals that only 2.5\% of the\tabcellsep the Islamic banks are adequate but a significant number\\ respondents strongly agreed and 60.3\% simply agreed\tabcellsep that is 26.4\% of the opined neutral and 10.7\% disagreed\\ that the information disclosed in the annual reports of\tabcellsep in this point. Therefore, it may infer from here that\end{longtable} \par {\small\itshape [Note: © 2013 Global Journals Inc. (US)]} \caption{\label{tab_14}Table 12}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{13} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.11261343012704174\textwidth}P{0.28539019963702356\textwidth}P{0.0956442831215971\textwidth}P{0.10952813067150635\textwidth}P{0.05707803992740472\textwidth}P{0.05553539019963702\textwidth}P{0.0647912885662432\textwidth}P{0.06941923774954628\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{of the Islamic banks}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Effectiveness of Information\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{Strongly Agree Count}\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 24\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep 23.8\%\tabcellsep 36.7\%\tabcellsep 4.5\%\tabcellsep 20.7\%\tabcellsep 19.8\%\\ Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 14\tabcellsep 12\tabcellsep 16\tabcellsep 12\tabcellsep 14\tabcellsep 68\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 73.7\%\tabcellsep 57.1\%\tabcellsep 53.3\%\tabcellsep 54.5\%\tabcellsep 48.3\%\tabcellsep 56.2\%\\ Neutral\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 20\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 10.5\%\tabcellsep 14.3\%\tabcellsep 3.3\%\tabcellsep 31.8\%\tabcellsep 24.1\%\tabcellsep 16.5\%\\ Disagree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 9\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 10.5\%\tabcellsep 4.8\%\tabcellsep 6.7\%\tabcellsep 9.1\%\tabcellsep 6.9\%\tabcellsep 7.4\%\\ Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_15}Table 13 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.21542699724517905\textwidth}P{0.20840220385674932\textwidth}P{0.18264462809917356\textwidth}P{0.04214876033057851\textwidth}P{0.03980716253443526\textwidth}P{0.03980716253443526\textwidth}P{0.03980716253443526\textwidth}P{0.03980716253443526\textwidth}P{0.04214876033057851\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \multicolumn{7}{l}{Quality of Disclosure of Islamic Banks in Bangladesh: Evidence from A Survey}\tabcellsep \\ 2013\tabcellsep Disagree\tabcellsep Count \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 2 10.5\%\tabcellsep 1 4.8\%\tabcellsep 2 6.7\%\tabcellsep 1 4.5\%\tabcellsep 1 3.4\%\tabcellsep 7 5.8\%\\ Y ear\tabcellsep Total\tabcellsep Count \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 19 100.0\%\tabcellsep 21 100.0\%\tabcellsep 30 100.0\%\tabcellsep 22 100.0\%\tabcellsep 29 100.0\%\tabcellsep 121 100.0\%\\ Volume XIII Issue IV Version I\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ ( )\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Global Journal of Management and Business Research\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_16}}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{15} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.10759493670886076\textwidth}P{0.2920433996383363\textwidth}P{0.09529837251356238\textwidth}P{0.10913200723327304\textwidth}P{0.056871609403254975\textwidth}P{0.056871609403254975\textwidth}P{0.06301989150090416\textwidth}P{0.06916817359855335\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{of the Islamic banks}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Understandability of the Report\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ Strongly Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 23\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 15.8\%\tabcellsep 28.6\%\tabcellsep 36.7\%\tabcellsep 4.5\%\tabcellsep 6.9\%\tabcellsep 19.0\%\\ Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 12\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep 16\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 67\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 63.2\%\tabcellsep 47.6\%\tabcellsep 53.3\%\tabcellsep 45.5\%\tabcellsep 65.5\%\tabcellsep 55.4\%\\ Neutral\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 8\tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 23\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 15.8\%\tabcellsep 19.0\%\tabcellsep 6.7\%\tabcellsep 36.4\%\tabcellsep 20.7\%\tabcellsep 19.0\%\\ Disagree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 8\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep 4.8\%\tabcellsep 3.3\%\tabcellsep 13.6\%\tabcellsep 6.9\%\tabcellsep 6.6\%\\ Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_17}Table 15 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{14} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.13357142857142856\textwidth}P{0.27685714285714286\textwidth}P{0.06557142857142857\textwidth}P{0.13357142857142856\textwidth}P{0.05342857142857143\textwidth}P{0.051\textwidth}P{0.06557142857142857\textwidth}P{0.07042857142857142\textwidth}} Usefulness of the Information\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ Strongly Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 24\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 15.8\%\tabcellsep 19.0\%\tabcellsep 36.7\%\tabcellsep 9.1\%\tabcellsep 13.8\%\tabcellsep 19.8\%\\ Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 12\tabcellsep 14\tabcellsep 16\tabcellsep 14\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 75\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 63.2\%\tabcellsep 66.7\%\tabcellsep 53.3\%\tabcellsep 63.6\%\tabcellsep 65.5\%\tabcellsep 62.0\%\\ Neutral\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 15\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 10.5\%\tabcellsep 9.5\%\tabcellsep 3.3\%\tabcellsep 22.7\%\tabcellsep 17.2\%\tabcellsep 12.4\%\end{longtable} \par {\small\itshape [Note: © 2013 Global Journals Inc. (US)]} \caption{\label{tab_18}Table 14 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{17} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.09601851851851852\textwidth}P{0.29120370370370374\textwidth}P{0.1086111111111111\textwidth}P{0.09916666666666667\textwidth}P{0.05824074074074074\textwidth}P{0.05824074074074074\textwidth}P{0.0661111111111111\textwidth}P{0.0724074074074074\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{of the Islamic banks}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Predictive Value\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{Strongly Agree Count}\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 14\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep 9.5\%\tabcellsep 20.0\%\tabcellsep 9.1\%\tabcellsep 10.3\%\tabcellsep 11.6\%\\ Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 13\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 15\tabcellsep 60\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 36.8\%\tabcellsep 61.9\%\tabcellsep 63.3\%\tabcellsep 27.3\%\tabcellsep 51.7\%\tabcellsep 49.6\%\\ Neutral\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 9\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep 9\tabcellsep 35\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 47.4\%\tabcellsep 23.8\%\tabcellsep 6.7\%\tabcellsep 45.5\%\tabcellsep 31.0\%\tabcellsep 28.9\%\\ Disagree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 12\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 10.5\%\tabcellsep 4.8\%\tabcellsep 10.0\%\tabcellsep 18.2\%\tabcellsep 6.9\%\tabcellsep 9.9\%\\ Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{100.0\% 100.0\%}\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_19}Table 17 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{16} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.2371376811594203\textwidth}P{0.09547101449275362\textwidth}P{0.3972826086956522\textwidth}P{0.02463768115942029\textwidth}P{0.018478260869565215\textwidth}P{0.03695652173913043\textwidth}P{0.04003623188405797\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{5}{l}{o) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Relevancy of}\\ \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{4}{l}{the Information of the Islamic Banks}\tabcellsep \\ \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{of the Islamic banks}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Relevancy of Information\tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ Strongly Agree Count\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 23\\ \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep 33.3\%\tabcellsep 33.3\%\tabcellsep 4.5\%\tabcellsep 13.8\%\tabcellsep 19.0\%\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_20}Table 16 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{18} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.09408396946564886\textwidth}P{0.30009541984732824\textwidth}P{0.09732824427480916\textwidth}P{0.09083969465648854\textwidth}P{0.06650763358778626\textwidth}P{0.0648854961832061\textwidth}P{0.06650763358778626\textwidth}P{0.06975190839694656\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{of the Islamic banks}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Feedback\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Value\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep A. P.\tabcellsep B. E.\tabcellsep S. B.\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{Strongly Agree Count}\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 7\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 10.0\%\tabcellsep 9.1\%\tabcellsep 6.9\%\tabcellsep 5.8\%\\ Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 9\tabcellsep 14\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 9\tabcellsep 16\tabcellsep 69\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 47.4\%\tabcellsep 66.7\%\tabcellsep 70.0\%\tabcellsep 40.9\%\tabcellsep 55.2\%\tabcellsep 57.0\%\\ Neutral\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 9\tabcellsep 9\tabcellsep 36\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 36.8\%\tabcellsep 23.8\%\tabcellsep 20.0\%\tabcellsep 40.9\%\tabcellsep 31.0\%\tabcellsep 29.8\%\\ Disagree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 9\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 15.8\%\tabcellsep 9.5\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 9.1\%\tabcellsep 6.9\%\tabcellsep 7.4\%\\ Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_21}Table 18 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{20} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.10082116788321167\textwidth}P{0.2947080291970803\textwidth}P{0.09461678832116788\textwidth}P{0.10857664233576643\textwidth}P{0.057390510948905106\textwidth}P{0.057390510948905106\textwidth}P{0.0666970802919708\textwidth}P{0.06979927007299269\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{of the Islamic banks}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Reliability of Information\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ Strongly Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 16\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 35\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 15.8\%\tabcellsep 33.3\%\tabcellsep 53.3\%\tabcellsep 18.2\%\tabcellsep 17.2\%\tabcellsep 28.9\%\\ Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 9\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 12\tabcellsep 18\tabcellsep 61\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 47.4\%\tabcellsep 52.4\%\tabcellsep 36.7\%\tabcellsep 54.5\%\tabcellsep 62.1\%\tabcellsep 50.4\%\\ Neutral\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 17\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 31.6\%\tabcellsep 9.5\%\tabcellsep 6.7\%\tabcellsep 18.2\%\tabcellsep 10.3\%\tabcellsep 14.0\%\\ Disagree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 8\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep 4.8\%\tabcellsep 3.3\%\tabcellsep 9.1\%\tabcellsep 10.3\%\tabcellsep 6.6\%\\ Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_22}Table 20 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{19} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.12777777777777777\textwidth}P{0.30740740740740735\textwidth}P{0.07037037037037037\textwidth}P{0.09074074074074075\textwidth}P{0.0611111111111111\textwidth}P{0.0611111111111111\textwidth}P{0.06481481481481481\textwidth}P{0.06666666666666667\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{of Islamic banks}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Timeliness of\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Information\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep A. P.\tabcellsep B. E.\tabcellsep S. B.\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{Strongly Agree Count}\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 17\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 9\tabcellsep 45\\ \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{\% within Res\textunderscore Grop 21.1\%}\tabcellsep 52.4\%\tabcellsep 56.7\%\tabcellsep 18.2\%\tabcellsep 31.0\%\tabcellsep 37.2\%\\ Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 13\tabcellsep 9\tabcellsep 13\tabcellsep 16\tabcellsep 15\tabcellsep 66\\ \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{\% within Res\textunderscore Grop 68.4\%}\tabcellsep 42.9\%\tabcellsep 43.3\%\tabcellsep 72.7\%\tabcellsep 51.7\%\tabcellsep 54.5\%\\ Neutral\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 6\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 9.1\%\tabcellsep 10.3\%\tabcellsep 5.0\%\\ Disagree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 4\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep 4.8\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 6.9\%\tabcellsep 3.3\%\\ Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_23}Table 19 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{22} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.11147540983606558\textwidth}P{0.28642987249544627\textwidth}P{0.09599271402550091\textwidth}P{0.10837887067395265\textwidth}P{0.05573770491803279\textwidth}P{0.05728597449908925\textwidth}P{0.06502732240437159\textwidth}P{0.06967213114754098\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{of the Islamic banks}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Faithfulness of Information\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{Strongly Agree Count}\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 13\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 30\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 10.5\%\tabcellsep 33.3\%\tabcellsep 43.3\%\tabcellsep 13.6\%\tabcellsep 17.2\%\tabcellsep 24.8\%\\ Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep 12\tabcellsep 16\tabcellsep 13\tabcellsep 17\tabcellsep 68\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 52.6\%\tabcellsep 57.1\%\tabcellsep 53.3\%\tabcellsep 59.1\%\tabcellsep 58.6\%\tabcellsep 56.2\%\\ Neutral\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 17\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 31.6\%\tabcellsep 4.8\%\tabcellsep 3.3\%\tabcellsep 18.2\%\tabcellsep 17.2\%\tabcellsep 14.0\%\\ Disagree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 6\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep 4.8\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 9.1\%\tabcellsep 6.9\%\tabcellsep 5.0\%\\ Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_24}Table 22 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{21} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.09532710280373831\textwidth}P{0.24493769470404983\textwidth}P{0.08208722741433021\textwidth}P{0.19727414330218068\textwidth}P{0.05560747663551401\textwidth}P{0.05560747663551401\textwidth}P{0.05693146417445482\textwidth}P{0.06222741433021806\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{5}{l}{t) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Verifiability of}\\ \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{5}{l}{the Information of the Islamic Banks}\\ \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{of the Islamic banks}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Verifiability of\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Information\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep A. P.\tabcellsep B. E.\tabcellsep S. B.\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{Strongly Agree Count}\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 22\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep 19.0\%\tabcellsep 36.7\%\tabcellsep 4.5\%\tabcellsep 17.2\%\tabcellsep 18.2\%\\ Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 13\tabcellsep 16\tabcellsep 12\tabcellsep 14\tabcellsep 66\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 57.9\%\tabcellsep 61.9\%\tabcellsep 53.3\%\tabcellsep 54.5\%\tabcellsep 48.3\%\tabcellsep 54.5\%\\ Neutral\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 20\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 26.3\%\tabcellsep 9.5\%\tabcellsep 3.3\%\tabcellsep 22.7\%\tabcellsep 24.1\%\tabcellsep 16.5\%\\ Disagree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 13\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 10.5\%\tabcellsep 9.5\%\tabcellsep 6.7\%\tabcellsep 18.2\%\tabcellsep 10.3\%\tabcellsep 10.7\%\\ Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_25}Table 21 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.04265232974910394\textwidth}P{0.2406810035842294\textwidth}P{0.05788530465949821\textwidth}P{0.05483870967741935\textwidth}P{0.05483870967741935\textwidth}P{0.05788530465949821\textwidth}P{0.1553763440860215\textwidth}P{0.06093189964157705\textwidth}P{0.12491039426523297\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep 2013\\ \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep ear\\ \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep Y\\ Disagree Total\tabcellsep Count \% within Res\textunderscore Grop Count \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 2 10.5\% 19 100.0\%\tabcellsep 1 4.8\% 21 100.0\%\tabcellsep 2 6.7\% 30 100.0\%\tabcellsep 3 13.6\% 22 100.0\%\tabcellsep 3 10.3\% 29 100.0\%\tabcellsep 11 9.1\% 121 100.0\%\tabcellsep Volume XIII Issue IV Version I\\ \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep ( )\\ \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{© 2013 Global Journals Inc. (US)}\tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_26}}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{2423} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.10648351648351648\textwidth}P{0.20362637362637362\textwidth}P{0.08780219780219779\textwidth}P{0.26901098901098897\textwidth}P{0.041098901098901096\textwidth}P{0.03923076923076923\textwidth}P{0.04857142857142857\textwidth}P{0.05417582417582417\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{5}{l}{v) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Neutrality of}\\ \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{4}{l}{the Information of the Islamic Banks}\tabcellsep \\ \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{of the Islamic banks}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ Neutrality of Information\tabcellsep \tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{Strongly Agree Count}\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 21\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 10.5\%\tabcellsep 23.8\%\tabcellsep 36.7\%\tabcellsep 4.5\%\tabcellsep 6.9\%\tabcellsep 17.4\%\\ Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep 8\tabcellsep 15\tabcellsep 12\tabcellsep 17\tabcellsep 62\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 52.6\%\tabcellsep 38.1\%\tabcellsep 50.0\%\tabcellsep 54.5\%\tabcellsep 58.6\%\tabcellsep 51.2\%\\ Neutral\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 27\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 26.3\%\tabcellsep 33.3\%\tabcellsep 6.7\%\tabcellsep 27.3\%\tabcellsep 24.1\%\tabcellsep 22.3\%\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_27}Table 24 :Table 23 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{26} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.12668977469670709\textwidth}P{0.3211438474870017\textwidth}P{0.06039861351819757\textwidth}P{0.12816291161178509\textwidth}P{0.0427209705372617\textwidth}P{0.0427209705372617\textwidth}P{0.06187175043327556\textwidth}P{0.06629116117850953\textwidth}} \tabcellsep \multicolumn{4}{l}{systems of the Islamic banks}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\ \multicolumn{2}{l}{Effectiveness of Accounting Information Systems}\tabcellsep P. A.\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Respondent Group A. P. B. E. S. B.}\tabcellsep I. V.\tabcellsep Total\\ Strongly Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 9\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 20\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep 19.0\%\tabcellsep 30.0\%\tabcellsep 4.5\%\tabcellsep 17.2\%\tabcellsep 16.5\%\\ Agree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 14\tabcellsep 15\tabcellsep 13\tabcellsep 64\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 57.9\%\tabcellsep 52.4\%\tabcellsep 46.7\%\tabcellsep 68.2\%\tabcellsep 44.8\%\tabcellsep 52.9\%\\ Neutral\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 7\tabcellsep 5\tabcellsep 11\tabcellsep 33\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 31.6\%\tabcellsep 19.0\%\tabcellsep 23.3\%\tabcellsep 22.7\%\tabcellsep 37.9\%\tabcellsep 27.3\%\\ Disagree\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 2\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 4\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 5.3\%\tabcellsep 9.5\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 4.5\%\tabcellsep .0\%\tabcellsep 3.3\%\\ Total\tabcellsep Count\tabcellsep 19\tabcellsep 21\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 29\tabcellsep 121\\ \tabcellsep \% within Res\textunderscore Grop\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{100.0\% 100.0\% 100.0\%}\tabcellsep 100.0\%\tabcellsep 100.0\%\end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_29}Table 26 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{} \par \begin{longtable}{} \end{longtable} \par \caption{\label{tab_30}}\end{figure} \footnote{© 2013 Global Journals Inc. (US)} \footnote{D© 2013 Global Journals Inc. (US)} \backmatter \par Using SPSS software the obtained value of ?2 is 19.324 at .081 level of significance and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding comparability of the information provided by Islamic banks in Bangladesh.\par x) Opinion of the Respondents regarding Consistency of the Information of the Islamic Banks\par The results of the opinion of the respondents regarding consistency of the information provided by Islamic banks in their annual reports are presented in Table {\ref 25}:\par From the Table {\ref 24}, it can be observed that 2.5\% of the respondents thought negatively and 19.8\% opined their neutral position regarding comparability of the information of the Islamic banks but 14.9\% shows their strong positive position and 62.8\% shows simple positive stance in this point.\par In order to test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 17 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding comparability of the information of Islamic banks. On the basis of the Table {\ref 27}, it can be said that 30.6\% of the respondents strongly agreed and 63.6\% of them merely agreed that regarding compliance of all rules and regulations of appointment of auditors by the Islamic banks. But 5.8\% of them opined either neutral or disagree in this point.\par In order to test whether there are significant differences among the opinion of the respondents, we conducted ?2 test using SPSS software. Accordingly we develop a null hypothesis as follows: H 0 20 : There is no significance difference among the opinions of the respondents regarding appointment of auditors of Islamic banks.\par We obtained value of ?2 is 20.532 at .058 level of significance using SPSS software and therefore the null hypothesis is accepted which means that there is no significant differences among the opinion of the respondents regarding compliance of all rules and regulations of appointment of auditors by the Islamic banks.\par Quality audit is expected to produce quality information. The respondents were asked regarding quality of audit of the Islamic banks. The results of the responses of the respondents in this regard are presented in \begin{bibitemlist}{1} \end{bibitemlist} \end{document}