MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3129374757 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2021.1.020

Corporate governance on financial distress: Evidence from Indonesia

2021· article· en· W3129374757 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eka Handriani, Imam Ghozali, Hersugodo Hersugodo

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicWorking Capital and Financial Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDirecció General de Recerca, Generalitat de CatalunyaDirektorat Riset dan Pengabdian Masyarakat
KeywordsProfitability indexStock exchangeCorporate governanceBusinessLISRELAccountingFinancial distressFinancial ratioVariablesPrincipal–agent problemEconomicsFinanceFinancial systemStructural equation modelingStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main objective of this paper is to explore the most significant determinants of financial distress of manufacturing companies in Indonesia and to provide explanations on this issue by using multiple regression models. With Modigliani and Miller’s and Trade-off theories were reviewed to formulate a testable proposition on the determinants of financial distress of manufacturing companies in Indonesia. Multiple regression models were used as a statistical tool to investigate the most significant profitability determinants of manufacturing companies in Indonesia. The Lisrel software was used to analyze 300 manufacturing companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. It was found that institutional ownership, firm size, profitability, and board independence as variables had a positive relationship in an effort to avoid financial distress. Meanwhile, the board size variable had an insignificant positive relationship. The findings are consistent with the pecking order and financial agency theory which helps in understanding the application of financial distress studies for manufacturing companies in Indonesia.

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)0.003
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations32
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicWorking Capital and Financial PerformanceFrench-language works237,207