MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174971910 · doi:10.1002/mde.3396

Nexus between corporate social responsibility and earnings management: Sustainable or opportunistic

2021· article· en· W3174971910 on OpenAlexaff
Sadaf Ehsan, Adeel Tariq, Mian Sajid Nazir, Malik Shahzad Shabbir, Rizwan Shabbir, Lydia Bares, Wasim Ullah

Bibliographic record

VenueManagerial and Decision Economics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Social Responsibility Reporting
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate social responsibilityNexus (standard)AccrualEarnings managementAccountingOrdinary least squaresBusinessPanel dataEarningsQualitative comparative analysisEconometricsEconomicsPublic relationsStatisticsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the association between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and earnings management (EM) among manufacturing firms from a developing economy, Pakistan. To deal with the CSR measurement and data bias, a multimethod approach has applied to measure CSR (both qualitative and quantitative approaches). This research has also established CSR disclosure indices and CSR monetary spending ratio (CSR MSR). Moreover, this research examines both types of EM (accrual‐based as well as real activities‐based) and used annual data set from 2009 to 2018 for 160 nonfinancial firms. For empirical analysis, the two‐stage least square (2SLS) and pooled ordinary least square (POLS) regressions are used. This study finds a negative relationship between CSR and EM, and it supports the notion that firms' commitment to CSR is largely driven by long‐term perspective. However, with respect to each measure of EM and CSR, this relationship is asymmetric.

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)0.005
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
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations75
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagerial and Decision EconomicsSame topicCorporate Social Responsibility ReportingFrench-language works237,207