Les déterminants de l'adoption anticipée des normes comptables internationales : choix financier ou opportunisme ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Le règlement CE 1606/2002 oblige toutes les sociétés cotées de l’union européenne à appliquer le référentiel comptable international à partir du premier janvier 2005. Le but de cette étude est de comprendre le choix de l’adoption anticipée des normes internationales (IAS/IFRS). À l’aide d’un modèle logistique, elle identifie les déterminants de l’adoption anticipée des IAS/IFRS pour un échantillon de 106 entreprises allemandes et autrichiennes. Elle examine également si l’adoption des IAS/IFRS sert d’opportunité pour maquiller la situation financière. Les résultats révèlent que la probabilité d’adoption anticipée des IAS/IFRS augmente avec la taille, l’intensité capitalistique, la dispersion de l’actionnariat et la croissance anormale de la taille et de la rentabilité de la firme. Des analyses supplémentaires permettent de déduire que l’adoption anticipée est motivée par la recherche de financement plutôt que par la manipulation de la situation financière.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".