MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114965963 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2013.05.018

A study on relationship between earnings management and operating cash flows management: Evidence from Tehran Stock Exchange

2013· article· en· W2114965963 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bahman Banimahd, Mina Jalali Aliabadi

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarnings managementOperating cash flowCash managementCash flowBusinessCash flow forecastingStock exchangeCash flow statementMonetary economicsFinancial managementCash on cash returnFinanceCash and cash equivalentsEarningsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the impact of earnings management on operating cash flows management over the period 2004-2011 using the information of 119 firms listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange.Results indicate that there is a meaningful relationship between earnings management and operating cash flows management.In other words, earnings management creates and shapes operating cash flows management.In addition, after controlling for the loss reporting, firm size and firm's financial risk, the results show that there was a relationship between loss reporting and firm size with the cash flows management.When firms report loss, then operating cash flows increases.Finally, operating cash flows decreases when firm size increases.However, our survey does not provide any evidence to believe there is any relationship between financial risk and cash flows management.

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)0.004
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations15
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicAuditing, Earnings Management, GovernanceFrench-language works237,207