MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128199404 · doi:10.1111/jori.12107

Directors' and Officers' Liability Insurance, Corporate Risk and Risk Taking: New Panel Data Evidence on The Role of Directors' and Officers' Liability Insurance

2015· article· en· W2128199404 on OpenAlexaffabout
M. Martin Boyer, Sharon Tennyson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Risk & Insurance · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPanel dataBusinessActuarial scienceLiability insuranceCorporate governanceEarningsLiabilityAuto insurance risk selectionRisk managementGeneral insuranceInsurance policyAccountingEconomicsFinanceEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This article develops and tests hypotheses regarding the relationship between directors’ and officers’ (D&O) insurance purchase and firm size, governance characteristics, and business risk, using a unique panel data set on Canadian firms for years 1996–2005. The data permit examination of the determinants of insurance pricing, ownership and coverage limits, and the effects of insurance on board characteristics and earnings management. Results using panel data methods and controlling for endogenous prices and endogenous selection into insurance ownership provide strong statistical evidence for the view that D&O insurance markets take corporate risk into account, but that insurance leads to greater risk taking.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.584
Threshold uncertainty score0.836

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations86
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Risk & InsuranceSame topicAuditing, Earnings Management, GovernanceFrench-language works237,207