The Mediating Role of the Firm Image in the Relationship Between Integrated Reporting and Firm Value in GCC Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the context of the GCC, the adoption of integrated reporting (IR) remains limited, due in part to weak regulatory enforcement, a lack of awareness of the strategic benefits of IR, and a strong focus on short-term financial results. This limited reporting context presents a significant challenge for firms to credibly demonstrate their value to the market and attract potential investors, thus communicating long-term value. Given these limitations, this study considers how IR contributes to firm value, but also examines the mediating role that firm image (FI) plays in this relationship as a reputational construct representing stakeholder perspectives of a firm’s transparency and accountability. The research employs a quantitative methodology, analysing secondary data from corporate governance and integrated reports spanning 2017–2018 to 2022–2023. Findings indicate a positive and robust relationship between integrated reporting and the firm’s value, which was assessed using Tobin’s Q. The findings highlight the significant mediating role of firm image, illustrating how IR practices, via increased transparency, accountability, and sustainability, enhance firm value. This study provides significant insights for researchers, policymakers, and corporate managers, highlighting the strategic relevance of IR in the GCC region. The findings demonstrate that integrated reporting improves transparency, accountability, and sustainability, thereby assisting corporate managers in utilising IR to enhance firm image and facilitate value creation. Policymakers can utilise these insights to develop regulatory frameworks that promote integrated reporting practices, thereby enhancing transparency and sustainable growth within the corporate sector.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".