This discussion considers four aspects of the survey paper on empirical accounting choice research by Fields, Lys and Vincent: implications of the authors' selection of an expansive definition of accounting choice and their decision to classify this research by managerial motives; implications of the authors' decision to include implementation decisions in their definition of accounting choice; implications of the authors' call for research on the consequences of accounting choice, including the costs of defective accounting choices and the benefits of superior choices; implications of the authors' call for a reconsideration of research designs that explicitly consider groups of accounting choices. © 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.