Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this study was to establish the stock price reaction to dividend announcements of firms quoted at the Tunisian Securities exchange (TSE). To do so, we develop a traditional event study. Two robust results emerge: First, when we observe the 196 announcements of dividends between years 1996-2004, the result is inconsistent with signaling theory, as long as, no abnormal return was observed on the announcement day (event period). Second, When the overall sample is divided into three sub-group (dividend increase, dividend-no-change and dividend), we observe a significant and abnormal return about -1.242 percent and -1.697 percent respectively on day D(t0-4) and D(t0+4) around the dividend announcement day (Dt0) only for the sub-group of firms that decreases their dividend. This result corroborates prior research in Tunisian context [Ben Naceur and al. (2006); Guizani and Kouki (2011)] that confirm, by using a different approach, the Lintner’s (1956) conclusions which states that Tunisian’ firms generally tend to avoid a dividend decrease (or cuts) and can constitute a supporting evidence of the dividend information content hypothesis in TSE.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".