The Mediating Role of Profitability in the Impact Relationship of Assets Tangibility on Firm Market Value
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to investigate whether the asset tangibility of the listed mining and extraction firms at the Amman Stock Exchange institution affects the market value of these firms and whether firm profitability mediates the impact relationship of asset tangibility on firm market value. To achieve the objectives of this study, secondary data covering the period 2013–2022 of the entire listed mining and extraction firms were collected and used in the analysis. Tobin’s Q is used as a good indicator of firm market value, while return on assets is used as a common indicator of firm profitability. Asset tangibility is the percentage relationship of tangible fixed assets to total assets. Employing both the single and multiple linear regression methods, the results showed a significant impact of asset tangibility on firm profitability and firm market value. The results also demonstrated that firm profitability has a significant impact on firm market value. In addition, the results revealed that firm profitability mediates the effect of asset tangibility on firm market value. The empirical findings have important implications when policies that lead to higher firm value are adopted and correctly followed. More research is recommended to investigate this relationship in other industries.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it