MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295122245 · doi:10.54691/bcpbm.v27i.1957

Top Executives’ Overconfidence and Investment Efficiency Based on Data Analysis by Regression Method and CSMAR: Evidence from China

2022· article· en· W4295122245 on OpenAlexaff
Yiwen Ji, Jiacheng Liu, Yankai Shi, Weize Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueBCP Business & Management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicRisk Management in Financial Firms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverconfidence effectPanel dataInvestment (military)Regression analysisBusinessChinaActuarial scienceAccountingEconomicsEconometricsComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies the impact of management's overconfidence on corporate investment and decision-making. Using the China A-share listed companies and the data from the CSMAR database, applying the regression method to estimate the investment efficiency of the enterprises, this research studies the quantitative relationship between the executive overconfidence and the panel data model and packet regression. This paper finds that management overconfidence is positively associated with an inefficient corporate investment. Strictly controlling the confidence level of enterprise management and strengthening supervision are important measures to ensure the good operation of enterprises, reduce operational risks and achieve sustainable development.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBCP Business & ManagementSame topicRisk Management in Financial FirmsFrench-language works237,207