Impact of Audit Quality on the Implementation of Corporate Governance in the Insurance Companies Listed in Amman Stock Exchange
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study aimed to identify the concepts and principles underpinning the corporate governance, and get to know the level of commitment of the Jordanian insurance companies' implementation of the instructions of corporate governance issued by the insurance commission, and determining the effect of audit quality on the level of implementation of the instructions of corporate governance. The study was conducted on a sample consists of 15 Jordanian Insurance Companies listed in the Amman Stock Exchange, during the period from 2011 to 2014. Audit quality was measured by the size of the audit office, audit fees, and auditor retention, relying on the instructions of corporate governance for insurance companies. The researcher designed a questionnaire containing five sections Associated with each of the board of directors, executive management, and the audit committee, risk management, and internal control system, and internal audit, the questionnaire was distributed to insurance company's staff who occupy different managerial positions. To achieve the objectives of the study the researcher used a number of statistical methods that fit the nature of the variables of the study, such as (Simple linear Regression model) and (Multiple Regression model) to test the hypotheses of the study. The study results showed that the Jordanian insurance companies show an acceptable commitment of the corporate governance instructions implementation; also, it showed that there is an impact of audit quality on the implementation of these instructions. Based on these results, the study provides a set of recommendations including Identify regulators responsible for following up the actual implementation of instructions of corporate governance in insurance companies, and reformulation of these instructions in a way to ensure the protection of the rights of stakeholders, and to clarify the functions and responsibilities of the Audit Committee. In addition, to focusing on the role of the external auditor, and working on increasing external auditor communication with the Audit Committee and Internal Auditors.
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 | 0.007 | 0.027 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".