Investigation on the Value Relevance of Integrated Reporting and Organizational Capital: Evidence From Sri Lanka
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Integrated reporting is a developing reporting aspect in order to assess problems relating to corporate reporting. It provides a comprehensive account of organizational worth. This paper aims to assess whether integrated reporting and organizational capital increase the value relevance of firms. A checklist containing 100 integrated reports of banks which are listed in Colombo stock exchange were used for the analysis. Data were collected over the period from 2010 to 2019. Statistical analysis was done using the EWIS. Finding reveals that the book value of equity, earnings before interest and taxation of the equity of the bank, leverage of the bank and Organizational capital have a direct effect on the market value of equity of the bank while return on equity and size does not have a positive impact on the market value of equity of the bank. And to the best of our knowledge, it reveals that there is a significant effect of integrated reporting on the value relevance of organizations. Future research avenues were identified and the suggestions for future research on integrated reporting were provided. The findings bring out different implications for managers, decision-makers and the research community as well. This study further expands the existing knowledge on integrated reporting and sets the foundation for future researchers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.167 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".