MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946817255 · doi:10.23977/etmhs.2017.1014

Political Connections of Independent Directors and Firm Performance: Evidence of Chinese listed Manufacturing Companies over 2008-2013

2017· article· en· W2946817255 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Changzheng Zhang, Yuefan Lv, Qian Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Educational Technology and Psychology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPolitical Influence and Corporate Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Science Foundation of Shaanxi ProvinceNational Social Science Fund of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPoliticsBusinessManufacturingAccountingIndustrial organizationPolitical scienceMarketingLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper investigates the effect of the political connections of independent directors on firm performance by choosing the panel data consisting of 2994 firm-years observations in Chinese listed manufacturing listed companies during 2008-2013 as the sample.Empirical analysis by adopting multiple regression analysis based on OLS by with SPSS19.0 makes a new finding, i.e, there is a positive relationship between the political connections of independent directors and firm performance measured by ROE and EPS.Further investigation shows that the richness of independent directors' political connections improves firm performance by providing more resources instead of inputting extra knowledge, ideas or perspectives.Therefore, the political connections of independent directors has potential negative effects on firm's long-termed competitive edge, since current richer resources would lower the recognition of the top executives on the importance of enhancing internal core competence.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Educational Technology and PsychologySame topicPolitical Influence and Corporate StrategiesFrench-language works237,207