MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138261856 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v7n11p51

Corporate Governance Disclosure in Annual Financial Reports and Company Performance - Evidence from Saudi Arabia

2014· article· en· W2138261856 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sherif S. Elbarrad

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReturn on equityAccountingBusinessShareholderReturn on assetsCorporate governanceEarnings per shareEquity (law)EarningsAnnual reportFinanceProfitability index

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this research is to find the relationship between disclosure in annual reports as outlined in the corporate governance regulations imposed by the Saudi Capital Market Authority and companies’ performance in Saudi Arabia. To achieve that, the corporate governance disclosure regulations are classified into four categories; Ownership structure and shareholders’ rights; board of directors’ information; financial information; operational information. Each category included several variables that are disclosed on the annual reports. This research is conducted on three sectors (Banking, Cement and Multi-Investment) to measure the relationship between those variables and company performance measured by three measures, namely Return on Assets (ROA), Return on Equity (ROE) and Price to Earnings ratio (PE). The results revealed that both ROE and ROA correlate with some of the disclosure variables. However, these variables differ from one sector to the other. Very few variables correlate with the PE ratio. The result confirms results achieved by previous studies conducted on the local and international level.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.021
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.282
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicAuditing, Earnings Management, GovernanceFrench-language works237,207