MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296822341 · doi:10.1111/1911-3846.12826

Social Networks Analysis in Accounting and Finance*

2022· article· en· W4296822341 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pietro A. Bianchi, Monika Causholli, Miguel Minutti‐Meza, Valbona Sulcaj

Bibliographic record

VenueContemporary Accounting Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuditAccountingContext (archaeology)Social network analysisSocial accountingAccounting researchWork (physics)BusinessFinanceManagement accountingSociologySocial capitalEngineeringSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Social network analysis (SNA) examines whether interactions between individuals, teams, and organizations result in network structures and patterns that can explain important outcomes, including firm performance, management reporting behaviors, investor beliefs, and audit outcomes. This paper reviews the growing body of work on SNA in accounting and finance research, focusing on 162 articles published between 2000 and 2021, and offers a roadmap that may help move this literature forward. Our survey summarizes the elements of SNA, organizes this literature within a theoretical framework, and provides a thematic discussion of the context and contribution of the selected studies. We also discuss opportunities and challenges for future research. Finally, we include an empirical illustration of the key concepts and tools of SNA. We believe that SNA will continue to offer an interesting avenue for conducting high‐impact and cross‐disciplinary research in accounting and finance.

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)0.011
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations77
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContemporary Accounting ResearchSame topicAuditing, Earnings Management, GovernanceFrench-language works237,207