Bibliographic record
Abstract
• CSR toward employees positively affects the quantity, the scientific quality, and the economic value of patents. • The positive impact of CSR toward employees on innovation is more substantial in high R&D intensity and growing firms. • The impact of CSR toward employees on innovation is more substantial in the presence of stronger corporate governance. • Stronger governance is required for CSR to limit the moral hazard problem that reduces firms' innovation. This study examined the impact of CSR toward employees (WS) on corporate innovation, using a sample of U.S. firms from 2002 to 2019. It provides the first evidence that better WS is beneficial for firms, resulting in a significant increase in both the quantity and the quality of patents. The positive impact of WS on innovation is more substantial in high R&D intensity and growing firms, while it is relatively weaker for mature firms. The study also explores how WS affects innovation output under various conditions and highlights the moderating role of corporate governance mechanisms, specifically the corporate governance score, board gender diversity, and auditor independence. Therefore, firms should enhance both their internal governance quality and WS to innovate.
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 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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".