MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387223032 · doi:10.18196/jai.v24i3.18397

The role of financial distress and fraudulent financial reporting: A mediation effect testing

2023· article· en· W4387223032 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Reskino Reskino, Aditia Darma

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Accounting and Investment · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Governance and Financial Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of DhakaTaras Shevchenko National University of KyivYork University
KeywordsBusinessAccountingCorporate governanceFinancial ratioStock exchangeFinancial distressAuditFinanceCreditorFinancial systemDebt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research aims: This study examines the determinants of fraudulent financial reporting with financial distress as an intervening agent.Design/Methodology/Approach: The banking companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (IDX) between 2017 and 2020 comprised the study's population. One hundred-four companies comprised the entire sample, which was chosen using purposive sampling. The approach employed in this study was partial least squares (PLS)-SEM.Research findings: The results of this study found that financial targets and audit quality significantly affected financial distress. Financial distress had a significant effect on fraudulent financial reporting. Financial targets and audit quality had no significant effect on fraudulent financial reporting. Furthermore, audit quality significantly affected fraudulent financial reporting through financial distress. Financial targets did not significantly influence fraudulent financial reporting through financial distress.Theoretical contribution/Originality: This study provides literature on the role of financial conditions and good corporate governance in preventing fraudulent financial reporting in banking companies. This study can be an insight for practitioners and academics in Indonesia and internationally. Apart from that, this study contributes to the literature on the occurrence of fraudulent financial statements mediated by financial distress, which is not widely discussed, specifically in the context of the banking industry in developing countries.Practitioner/Policy implication: The practical implication in this research is the importance for investors and creditors to be more vigilant and pay attention to corporate governance and financial conditions to reduce errors in decisions based on financial reports. In addition, the strength of good corporate governance indicates that the supervision carried out by management will take the information conveyed to stakeholders free from material misstatement so that the implementation of good corporate governance can prevent fraud. Research limitation/Implication: This study exclusively includes companies in the banking sector listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange (BEI) between 2017 and 2020. Out of 46 companies, only 26 may be used as research objects according to the purposive sampling method.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Accounting and InvestmentSame topicCorporate Governance and Financial ManagementFrench-language works237,207