Influence of Senior Executives Characteristics on Corporate Environmental Disclosures: A Bibliometric Analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to synthesize the literature on the top management team (TMT) characteristics influence on environmental disclosures of public organizations and identify recent trends, key themes, influential journals, and authors. Our study recruited 88 research articles on the relationship of TMT characteristics and environmental disclosures from 54 academic journals published from 2010 to 2021 for bibliometric analysis. Our study has identified three influential streams: (1) Role of Politically connections of TMT, good governance in environmental disclosures; (2) Significance of environmental disclosures and performance; and (3) institutional investors and environmental disclosures. Thematic map classifies the TMT characteristics and environmental disclosures relationship themes into four categories: Niche theme (e.g., financial expertise, CFO characteristics, CEO tenure, and board backgrounds); motor themes (e.g., environmental sustainability and climate change); emerging/declining themes (e.g., Environmental disclosure, managerial ownership, and CEO tenure); and basic/transversal themes (e.g., CEO characteristics, upper echelon theory, corporate governance). This study assists academicians, policymakers, managers, and consultants in the corporate sector to understand the role of different dimensions of TMT characteristics regarding environmental disclosures. Our study concludes with important practical implications and future research directions.
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.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | high |
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.019 | 0.026 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it