MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3167705277 · doi:10.5267/j.ac.2021.4.019

The role of corporate governance in earnings persistence: Audit committee as a moderation variable

2021· article· en· W3167705277 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Heni Agustina, Rizki Amalia Elfita, Djoko Soelistya, Ninnasi Muttaqiin, Mochamad Mochklas

Bibliographic record

VenueAccounting · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Governance and Financial Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceBusinessAccountingEarningsModerationAudit committeePopulationAuditPersistence (discontinuity)FinancePsychologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the current Covid-19 pandemic, it is undeniable that many companies are experiencing a decline in turnover, and some companies have even been forced to go out of business. Due to the many fraud incidents, corporate governance is vital in ensuring earnings persistence by considering many audit committee structures. Based on this phenomenon, the purpose of this study is to determine how significant the role of corporate governance is in overcoming earnings persistence moderated by the number of audit committees. This study is quantitative descriptive with a population of all companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Index (IDX), and the number of samples with several criteria found as many as six companies. This research period was conducted from 2011-2019. This result implies a positive influence on corporate governance moderated by the audit committee on earnings persistence. This led to point out that the power of corporate governance has a positive effect on earnings persistence.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAccountingSame topicCorporate Governance and Financial ManagementFrench-language works237,207