MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313251045 · doi:10.1108/jaar-04-2022-0086

CEO gender and readability of annual reports: do female CEOs’ demographic attributes matter?

2022· article· en· W4313251045 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Accounting Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReadabilityOrdinary least squaresPsychologyOriginalitySample (material)AccountingValue (mathematics)Test (biology)Association (psychology)Social psychologyDemographic economicsBusinessEconomicsEconometricsStatisticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This study examines the association between chief executive officer (CEO) gender and the readability of annual reports by considering some demographic attributes of female CEOs. Design/methodology/approach Ordinary least squares (OLS) regression is used to test the research hypotheses on a sample of S&P 500 firms between 2004 and 2016. Findings The results show that female CEOs are significantly positively associated with the readability of 10-K reports – in line with ethical-sensitivity theory. Further results show that this association is variable depending on the demographic attributes of female CEOs – in line with upper echelon theory. Specifically, older female CEOs and those with financial expertise are significantly associated with more readable 10-K reports. In contrast, female CEOs hired from within the firm are negatively associated with the readability of 10-K. Research limitations/implications This study provides evidence on the effect of female CEOs and their demographic attributes on annual report readability, which was not addressed in prior research. Practical implications The findings show that the appointment of female CEOs seems like a helpful avenue to reduce concerns among the regulators about the textual complexity of annual reports. However, the most important policy implication of the study is that the decision to appoint female CEOs should be based more on their demographic attributes than on gender equality recommendations and full trust in women's behavioral consequences. Originality/value This study contributes to the academic literature on readability and gender. Prior research has not clarified which attributes and skills of female CEOs drive their abilities to improve shareholder value and make more ethical decisions. This study suggests that female CEOs are not better “ per se ” to improve corporate governance practices, and the impacts of female CEOs are not the same and differ according to their demographic attributes.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.238 · 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