MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411730992 · doi:10.2308/bria-2024-010

The Effect of Sanction Target on Managers’ Compliance with Regulations

2025· article· en· W4411730992 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

VenueBehavioral Research in Accounting · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Sanctions and International Relations
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompliance (psychology)BusinessAccountingLaw and economicsPsychologySocial psychologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Regulators use sanctions to deter managers of organizations from harmful conduct. Regulatory sanctions sometimes target individual violating managers but sometimes target entire violating organizations. We use an economic experiment to study the effect of targeting individuals versus entire organizations on managers’ compliance decisions, both of which are compared to a condition with no sanctions. Leveraging theories on social norms and distributive fairness, we predict that managers will become less compliant when sanctions target individuals compared with no sanctions. However, firm-targeted sanctions do not reduce compliance, even if the monetary value of the sanction on the manager is the same across both conditions. Our results suggest that managers react to sanctions for social motivations and the effects are not always as intended. Data Availability: Data are available upon request. JEL Classifications: K20; K40; M48.

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)0.002
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 score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.241 · 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