{"id":"W2082047280","doi":"10.1080/09638180701819832","title":"Meta-analysis and the Accounting Literature: The Case of Audit Committee Independence and Financial Reporting Quality","year":2008,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"European Accounting Review","topic":"Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":51,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"Queen's University; University of Waterloo; University of Alberta","funders":"","keywords":"Accounting; Financial statement; Audit; Accrual; Quality audit; Business; Auditor independence; Audit evidence; Quality (philosophy); Independence (probability theory); Actuarial science; Joint audit; Internal audit; Earnings; Statistics","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":["metaresearch"],"consensus_categories":["metaresearch"],"category_scores_codex":[0.2958265,0.003550526,0.01362133,0.01802449,0.001590594,0.009578891,0.004977931,0.006161053,0.002461816],"category_scores_gemma":[0.5364144,0.001877965,0.03549752,0.02305428,0.003802136,0.008922521,0.0037375,0.005061454,0.0002339136],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.004279417,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.004971523,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00474393,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.006440888,"domain_scores_codex":[0.5369861,0.4083233,0.02597282,0.01331457,0.01383994,0.001563358],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.1793313,0.7675405,0.0273957,0.01928522,0.005564831,0.0008824996],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":"methods","domain_candidate":"methods","domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"meta_analysis","study_design_gemma":"meta_analysis","study_design_scores_codex":[0.001935313,0.00004124275,0.03351251,0.059402,0.8543115,0.0007736789,0.0007209108,0.00303024,0.0001777804,0.006532114,0.002214283,0.0373485],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.001249641,0.001052614,0.01958045,0.02759879,0.8990093,0.0009467506,0.0006784494,0.004778048,0.0005197459,0.03663076,0.007765224,0.0001901939],"study_design_candidate":"meta_analysis","study_design_consensus":"meta_analysis","genre_codex":"review","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.0172448,0.9488028,0.02298222,0.00719073,0.001174132,0.0004041502,0.0005010609,0.0001097712,0.001590365],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.6857353,0.2455968,0.05334615,0.007226638,0.003625668,0.002840732,0.0006129741,0.0002010341,0.0008147521],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":null,"teacher_disagreement_score":0.7041735,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.8683713,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.05440544353688167,"score_gpt":0.2771776366330103,"score_spread":0.2227721930961286,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}