MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2584966560 · doi:10.1177/0148558x16688115

Who Benefits From IFRS Convergence in China?

2017· article· en· W2584966560 on OpenAlexaff
Chao Chen, Edward Lee, Gerald J. Lobo, Jessie Y. Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Accounting Auditing & Finance · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsInternational Financial Reporting StandardsConvergence (economics)Capital marketEnforcementBusinessChinaStock marketAccountingMonetary economicsEconomicsFinanceMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the ex ante stock market reactions to events leading up to China’s convergence to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). The literature consistently shows that the benefits of mandatory IFRS convergence are concentrated in countries with stronger legal enforcement and investor protection. Given that these institutional characteristics are weaker in China relative to more developed Western economies, whether mandating IFRS will benefit the Chinese capital market is an interesting and important, but unanswered question. We find that the Chinese stock market reacts favorably to events leading up to IFRS convergence, and this effect is more pronounced among firms with greater dependence on external capital. This result suggests the market anticipates that such firms will benefit more from IFRS convergence, possibly because of improved financial reporting quality and access to external financing. Additional tests confirm that the value relevance of accounting numbers for these firms is higher following IFRS convergence.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations14
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Accounting Auditing & FinanceSame topicAuditing, Earnings Management, GovernanceFrench-language works237,207