MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4319729331 · doi:10.55482/jcim.2022.33292

Corporate Governance Characteristics and Financing Decisions of Listed Firms in Ghana

2022· article· en· W4319729331 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
James Ntiamoah Doku, Godsway Kofi Ametorwobla, Isaac Boadi, Francisca Adzoa Adzoh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative International Management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceStock exchangeExternal financingBusinessCorporate financeAccountingDebtPanel dataFinanceOrder (exchange)Pecking orderEconomicsEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the relationship between corporate governance attributes, firm-specific characteristics, and financing decisions of listed firms in Ghana using panel data for a nine-year time frame spanning 2011 to 2019. The study adopted multivariate regression analysis using Prais-Winsten regression, correlated panels corrected standard errors (PCSEs). The findings show that corporate board structures in Ghana play a significant role in influencing the financing decisions of listed firms on the Ghana Stock Exchange. Specifically, corporate boards with bigger sizes and more female representation prefer more debt financing of their assets. Also, the findings provide support for the Pecking Order Theory and identifiable firm-specific determinants of financing decision of listed firms. The evidence provided by this study is robust to alternative estimators. The outcome of this study further provides strong policy support for enforcing proper corporate governance features and gender diversity dimensions for corporations in Ghana.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative International Management→Same topicCorporate Finance and Governance→French-language works237,207→