MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896486659 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v10n11p63

Attitude and Motives Towards Corporate Social Responsibility in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

2018· article· en· W2896486659 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rawan Al Mohanna, Lama Al-kayed

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Social Responsibility Reporting
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate social responsibilityObligationBusinessSocial responsibilityMarketingPublic relationsMoral obligationKingdomAccountingPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the attitudes of large and small firms’ managers toward Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the motivations behind the implementation of such an initiative. The research revealed a gap in the minute number of studies exploring CSR practices the kingdom’s SMEs. There was a further gap in the managers’ motives towards CSR within the same region. As a way of responding to the four proposed research questions, the researchers surveyed 52 SME and large firms. Ideally, the results showed that large firms pursue traditional CSR practices and record their activities unlike SMEs, which follow a contemporary approach to CSR, with little regard to recording their activities. In addition, large firms significantly perceive CSR as an obligation, while SMEs rely on their board of management’s beliefs. This paper provides an insight for the policymakers to adopt different approaches for large and small firms in their implementation of CSR practices in pursuance of satisfactory reports.

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)0.002
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicCorporate Social Responsibility ReportingFrench-language works237,207