MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121838529 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v3n6p174

Corporate Social Disclosure during the Global Financial Crisis

2011· article· en· W3121838529 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Parvez Mia

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Social Responsibility Reporting
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfitability indexLeverage (statistics)Financial crisisBusinessFinancial systemAccountingEconomicsFinanceMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The significant amount of research related to corporate social disclosure (CSD) over the last few decades indicates its importance. Prior studies have revealed continuous improvement in the level of CSD by corporations in different sectors. The recent economic and financial crisis has been identified by many economic and financial experts as the worst since the Second World War and is likely to have an impact on level of CSD. This study examines the extent of CSD before and during global financial crisis for 48 selected Australian companies. The results of the study reveal that there is an insignificant upward change in CSD during the financial crisis. In addition, this study examines the association between several firm level factors (profitability, leverage, change in profitability, change in leverage and size) and the extent of CSD and change in CSD. The study finds that the extent of CSD is not significantly associated with leverage and profitability but it is significantly associated with size. Additionally, change in profitability and size do not have any significant influence on change in CSD. However, change in leverage has a significant negative association with change in CSD.

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)0.010
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations46
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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