Book value, earnings, dividends, and audit quality on the value relevance of accounting information among Nigerian listed firms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to determine the effect of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) as a new accounting reporting among Nigerian listed firms. This study uses book value, earnings and dividends to fill in the gap using a sample of 126 Nigerian listed firms in the stock market from 2009 to 2013 (pre and Post-IFRS adoption). Data was collected from Thompson Reuters, Bank scope DataStreams and annual reports. The study adopted Ohlson (1995) [Ohlson, J. (1995). Earnings, book-value, and dividends in equity valuation. Contemporary Accounting Research, 11(2), 661-687.] price model that has been frequently used in determining the quality of accounting information studies. The study finds that combined book value, earnings and dividends do not provide statistical significance effects on IFRS after adoption on the quality of accounting information. This could be possible, as dividends do not provide a significant effect in the presence of earnings. Furthermore, the audit big 4 quality provided an effect on the quality of accounting information because of IFRS adoption. Therefore, findings of this study provide additional literature on the decreasing quality of accounting information in an emerging market setting like Nigeria. The study implication is to the policy makers, regulators, and government that accounting information do not provide value relevance among Nigerian listed firms after IFRS adoption.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".