本研究主要探討以下四個問題(1)臺灣上市、櫃企業費用是否存在成本僵固性
之現象? (2)當企業存在成本僵固性時，成本僵固性是否會對企業未來績效有負面影
響?(3)企業會計穩健性，與未來績效無直接關係 (4)會計穩健性是否會降低成本僵
固性對企業未來績效造成負面影響的程度?
依據Anderson et al.(2003)等相關學者的研究，在相同條件不變之下，成本動因
上升時，成本及費用隨之而增加之幅度，會大於成本與費用隨成本動因下降而減少
之幅度。此一現象，稱之為成本僵固性(Cost Stickiness)。當企業出現成本僵固性時，
代表著企業不會根據目前營業狀況彈性調整相關成本與費用，若是經理人對未來
經營環境的判斷正確，企業未來的績效應該會有持續成長的現象，但是，經理人如
果是過度樂觀的預測，企業的未來績效在景氣下行時期，將會因為企業無法彈性調
整費用的支出，將呈現更明顯的下滑趨勢。因此，本研究推論成本僵固性的存在將
會造成公司正確決策上的干擾，將導致公司未來績效的負面不確定性因素。另一方
面，根據Hsu et.al(2018)的研究，由過度自信經理人管理的企業，若是該公司同時
存在會計穩健性的特質，其二者的交互作用將降低過度自信經理人對企業未來績
效的負面影響，反而成為績效提升的動力，因此，本研究推論穩健會計的存在應該
也能緩和成本僵固性為企業所帶來的不確定性因素的負面影響，甚至可以進一步
改善企業的未來績效。
本研究實證結果: (1) 臺灣上市、櫃企業費用的確存在成本僵固性的現象。(2)
當企業存在成本僵固性時，成本僵固性將會對企業未來績效產生負面影響。(3) 當
企業會計穩健性越高，公司未來績效並不會更佳。然而當企業存在成本僵固性時，
會計穩健性越高的公司確實能改善問題，讓公司有較佳的未來績效。

This study mainly discusses the following four questions: (1) Is the phenomena of
cost stickiness existent in Taiwan's listing and OTC companies? (2) When cost stickiness
exists in the companies, will the cost stickiness negatively affect their future performance?
(3) Corporate accounting robustness has no direct relationship with future performance
(4) Will the accounting conservatism reduce the degree of cost stickiness that will
negatively affect the future performance of the company?
According to related researches, especially that of Anderson et al. (2003), under the
same conditions, when the cost driver rises, the cost and cost increase will be larger than
the cost and cost decrease with the cost driver. This phenomenon is called Cost Stickiness.
When a company has cost stickiness, it means that the company will not adjust the
related costs and expenses flexibly according to the current business situation. If the
manager's judgment on the future operating environment is correct, the future
performance of the company should continue to grow. However, if the manager is overly
optimistic, the future performance of the company will decline with a accelerated
dynamic in the following down side economic develpoment, and the company will not be
able to adjust its expenses flexibly, which will show a more obvious downward trend.
Therefore, this study concludes that the existence of cost stickiness will cause
interference in the company's correct decision-making and will lead to negative
uncertainties in the company's future performance.
On the other hand, according to the research of Hsu et.al (2018), if a company
managed by an overconfident manager is at the same time the characteristics of
accounting conservatism, the interaction between the two will reduce the overconfident
manager's impact on the company. Their negative impacts on future performance has
become the driving force for performance improvement, instaed of unstable down side
impacts. This study concludes that the existence of robust accounting should also mitigate
the negative impact of uncertain factors brought about by cost stickiness for enterprises.
The empirical results of this study: (1) There is indeed a phenomenon of cost
stickiness in the fees of Taiwan listed and OTC companies. (2) When an enterprise exist
cost stickiness, cost stickiness will have a negative impact on the future performance of
iii
the enterprise. (3) The higher the soundness of corporate accounting, the better the
company's future performance will be. However, when companies have cost stickiness,
companies with higher accounting conservatism can indeed improve the problem and
allow the company to have better future performance.

摘要 ....................................................................................................................................i
ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... ii
圖目錄 ............................................................................................................................. vii
壹、緒論 ...................................................................................................................... - 1 -
一、研究動機 ....................................................................................................................... - 1 -
二、研究目的 ....................................................................................................................... - 3 -
三、論文架構 ....................................................................................................................... - 4 -
貳、文獻探討與假說發展 .......................................................................................... - 6 -
一、 成本僵固性 ................................................................................................................. - 6 -
二、穩健會計 ....................................................................................................................... - 7 -
參、研究設計 ............................................................................................................ - 10 -
一、 假說與模型 ............................................................................................................... - 10 -
二、樣本選取與資料來源 ................................................................................................. - 14 -
肆、實證結果 ............................................................................................................ - 16 -
一、樣本變數敘述統計量 ................................................................................................. - 16 -
(一)、敘述性統計 .......................................................................................................... - 16 -
(二)、相關係數 .............................................................................................................. - 18 -
二、實證結果分析 ............................................................................................................. - 21 -
伍、結論 .................................................................................................................... - 27 -
參考文獻 .................................................................................................................... - 28 -
一、中文部分 ..................................................................................................................... - 28 -
二、外文部分 ..................................................................................................................... - 29 -
表目錄
表 1 變數定義總表 ................................................................................................... - 13 -
表 2 樣本篩選過程 ................................................................................................... - 15 -
表 3 敘述性統計量(樣本數=4476) .......................................................................... - 17 -
表 4 VIF 之檢定 ........................................................................................................ - 20 -
表 5 以營業費用檢驗H1 假說 ................................................................................ - 21 -
表 6 以銷管費用檢驗H1 假說 ................................................................................ - 22 -
表 7 檢驗H2 H3 假說 ............................................................................................. - 24 -
表 8 檢驗H2 H3 假說 .............................................................................................. - 24 -
表 9 檢驗H4 假說 .................................................................................................... - 25 -
表 10 檢驗H4 假說 .................................................................................................. - 26 -
vii
圖目錄
圖 1 研究流程圖................................................................................................... - 5 -
圖 2 Spearman 相關係數.................................................................................... - 19 -

1. 王泰昌，林修葳，許文馨，陳漢鐘，劉嘉雯，2017，會計穩健性：基於亞洲
國家資料研究之回顧，臺大管理論叢，第27 卷第4 期，頁1-48。
2. 林有志，傅鍾仁，陳筱平，2011，成本僵固性之實證研究，當代會計，12
卷，2 期，頁191-220。
3. 邱韡梵，2016，成本僵固性與盈餘品質之關聯性，國立高雄第一科技大學，
碩士論文。
4. 彭火樹與陳美惠，2008，控制會計保守與盈餘成長估計權益資金成本之研
究，中山管理評論，16 卷4 期：823-849。
1. Anderson, M. C., R. D. Banker, and S. N. Janakiraman. 2003. Are selling, general,
and administrative costs “sticky”? Journal of Accounting Research 41 (1): 47-
63.
2. Ahmed, Anwer S. and Duellman, Scott, Accounting Conservatism and Board of
Director Characteristics: an Empirical Analysis (January 22, 2007).
3. Alicke, M. D., “Global Self-Evaluation as Determined by the Desirability and
Controllability of Trait Adjectives,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
Vol. 49, 1985, pp. 1621-1630.
4. Barniv, R., and Myring, M. 2006. An international analysis of historical and
forecast earnings in accounting-based valuation models. Journal of Business
Finance &Accounting, 33 (7-8)
5. Chen, L. H., Folsom, D. M, Paek, W., and Sami, H. 2014. Accounting
conservatism, earningspersistence, and pricing multiples on earnings. Accounting
Horizons, 28 (2): 233-260.
6. Foster, G., and M. Gupta. 1990. Manufacturing overhead cost driver analysis.
Journal of Accounting and Economics 12 (1-3): 309-337
7. Givoly, D. and Hayn, C. (2000) The Changing Time-Series Properties of Earnings,
Cash Flows and Accruals: Has Financial Reporting Become More Conservative?
Journal of Accounting and Economics, 29, 287-320.
8. Hsu, C., K. E. Novoselov and R. Wang, 2018, Does Accounting Conservatism
Mitigate the Shortcomings of CEO Overconfidence?. The Accounting Review,
92(6):77-101.
9. Larwood, L. and Whittaker, W., “Managerial Myopia: Self-Serving Biases in
- 30 -
Organizational Planning,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 62, No. 2, 1977, pp.
194-198.
10. Jensen, M. and Meckling, W., “Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency
Costs and Ownership Structure,” Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 3, No. 4,
1976, pp. 305-360.
11. Noreen, E., and N. Soderstrom. 1994. Are overhead costs strictly proportional to
activity? Evidence from hospital service departments. Journal of Accounting and
Economics 17 (1-2): 255-278.
12. Noreen, E., and N. Soderstrom. 1997. The accuracy of proportional cost models:
Evidence from hospital service departments. Review of Accounting Studies 2 (1):
89-114.
13. Miller, J. G., and T. E. Vollman. 1985. The hidden factory. Harvard Business
Review 63 (Sep): 142-150.
14. Svenson, O., “Are We All Less Risky and More Skillful than Our Fellow Drivers?”
Acta Psychologica, pp. 143-148.