Responds to an article in this same issue (which commented on these authors' 1993 article in the same journal). Suggests cultural context as another possible factor that may have caused results in the various studies under discussion to be different. (SR)

Tests the relationship between corporation performance and the readability of annual reports. Shows that annual reports of good performers were easier to read than those of poor performers--good performers used strong writing, unlike poor performers but did not use significantly more jargon or modifiers. (SR)