MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965015866 · doi:10.5539/mas.v13n8p40

The Effect of Dividend Policy on the Market Value of the Jordanian Commercial and Islamic Banks Listed on the Amman Stock Exchange

2019· article· en· W2965015866 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Naseem Abu Roman

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDividend policyDividendStock exchangeBusinessDividend payout ratioIslamValue (mathematics)AccountingStock marketFinancial systemFinanceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims at examining the effect of Dividend Policy on the market value of Jordanian commercial and Islamic banks. The study population consists of all Jordanian banks listed on the Amman Stock Exchange during the period from 2008 – 2018. Data were collected from the annual reports of the sample banks. After the data collection, they were analyzed using descriptive analysis, correlation analysis, and multiple regression analysis. The results showed a statistically significant impact of dividend policy, this result indicates that there is an impact of the dividend policy on the market value of Jordanian commercial and Islamic banks listed on the ASE during the period 2008-2018. The results also showed a difference between the companies in terms of dividend policy followed, in addition, asymmetry in the Dividend Policy in banks during the study period. The study recommended a number of recommendations, including that manager of firms, should develop effective dividend payout policies to ensure that their firms pay out dividends to enhance the value of their companies and plan an efficient and reliable dividend policy, to suit the wishes of investors, and to engage stakeholders in a dialogue on dividend policy.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.871

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.206 · 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.

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207