MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000741764 · doi:10.1080/09603100802599647

Ownership structure and the likelihood of financial distress in the Netherlands

2009· article· en· W2000741764 on OpenAlexaff
Han Donker, Bernard Santen, Saif Zahir

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Financial Economics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancial distressShareholderDistressEconomicsStock exchangeStock (firearms)BusinessEmpirical evidenceFinanceFinancial systemCorporate governancePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the impact of ownership structure on the likelihood of financial distress of Dutch firms listed on the Amsterdam Stock Exchange (Euronext) from 1992 to 2002. We find that firms with higher levels of managerial shareholdings are less likely to experience financial distress. This finding is consistent with the alignment hypothesis that managers with higher ownership stakes are more likely to avoid financial distress. We also find empirical evidence that large outside shareholders reduce the probability of financial distress. Monitoring incumbent management by large outside shareholders might prevent sub optimal managerial behaviour and reduce the likelihood of financial distress. Finally, we find no evidence that high levels of institutional shareholdings are associated with a lower probability of financial distress.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.162 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations96
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Financial EconomicsSame topicCorporate Finance and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207