MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412626245 · doi:10.1111/fire.70013

Political Risk, Political Polarization, and Earnings Management

2025· article· en· W4412626245 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

VenueFinancial Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsEarnings managementPolitical riskEarningsPolarization (electrochemistry)BusinessPolitical scienceAccountingLawChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We examine how exposure to firm‐level political risk (PRISK) affects corporate earnings management (EM). We present robust evidence that heightened PRISK leads to an increase in real earnings management (REM); however, we do not find consistent evidence supporting an increase in accrual earnings management (AEM). Our results remain robust when employing difference‐in‐differences (DiD), two‐stage least squares (2SLS), propensity score matching (PSM), and additional methods designed to address endogeneity concerns. Additionally, we document that firm‐level political polarization exposure (PPE) intensifies the PRISK‐REM relationship. More interestingly, the financial market is relatively forgiving to firms that engage in REM activities in the face of both high PRISK and high PPE. Our findings provide novel insights into how PRISK shapes the financial reporting quality, and the critical role PPE plays in this relationship.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.014
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.227 · 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