Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to review recent research on the structure of equity ownership and its impact on firm value. In doing so, the paper outlines the main issues, surveys the more recent work, and highlights the most promising developments on this topic. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is a survey – as such there is no relevant research design. Findings – The paper commences from multiple surveys done a decade ago that find that the evidence on this topic is inconclusive. Since then, researchers have developed several promising lines of inquiry. These approaches – specifically the new focus on the identity of the blockholders, multiple blockholder interactions, as well as the use of structural modeling, and the use of changes in insider ownership – hold some promise of being able to provide more definitive answers. Research limitations/implications – The paper suggests that current researchers focus on newer approaches to analyzing the structure of equity ownership. Specifically, for research on blockholder ownership, the identity of blockholders as well as the interaction between blockholders are promising approaches to this topic. For research on insider ownership, structural models that have become recently popular as well as an emphasis on changes rather than levels of insider ownership are promising avenues of inquiry. Originality/value – The paper summarizes the state of research on the structure of equity ownership and in doing so provides a quick introduction to a researcher new to this topic. In addition, the paper highlights the most promising areas of inquiry on this topic.
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 | 0.008 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".