Hiện nay quản trị công ty ở Việt Nam đã được các doanh nghiệp chú ý thể hiện ở
việc có các tổ chức hỗ trợ doanh nghiệp cải thiện chất lượng quản trị công ty cũng như hỗ
trợ các cơ quan quản lý trong việc ban hành chính sách, luật Điều này chứng tỏ, các
doanh nghiệp Việt Nam đang dần hoàn thiện cơ chế quản trị công ty của mình vì mục tiêu
phát triển không những trong phạm vi quốc gia mà còn hội nhập được với thế giới
Kết quả nghiên cứu cho thấy nếu công ty được kiểm toán bởi Big 4 thì sẽ hạn
chế được ĐCLN. Tuy vậy số lượng các công ty được kiểm toán bởi Big 4 là rất ít (chỉ
khoảng 22% trong khi các quốc gia khác lên tới 50% - 80% do đó các doanh nghiệp
cần chú ý lựa chọn các đơn vị kiểm toán lớn và có uy tín để đảm bảo thông tin cung
cấp có chất lượng tốt.
Tóm tại, những khuyến nghị có thể đưa ra đối với doanh nghiệp ở đây có thể là
ở trên 2 góc độ chính: Thứ nhất, là về vấn đề đào tạo, doanh nghiệp cần không ngừng
nâng cao trình độ chuyên môn và sự hiểu biết về vấn đề ĐCLN và tiếp theo sau là hỗ
trợ công tác đào tạo để đội ngũ nhân viên có thể tiếp cận và sử dụng các mô hình, công
cụ phát hiện ĐCLN từ đơn giản đến phức tạp nhằm hỗ trợ công tác phân tích và cung
cấp thông tin ra bên ngoài. Thứ hai, là vấn đề vận dụng kết quả nghiên cứu để đưa ra
các khuyến nghị cụ thể, từ những bằng chứng thực nghiệm, doanh nghiệp có cơ sở để
đưa ra các hướng đi cụ thể từ việc tránh vi phạm tỷ lệ nợ cho phép, tránh lạm dụng vị
thế của một công ty lớn cho đến việc củng cố chất lượng quản trị công ty, lựa chọn
đơn vị kiểm toán nhằm hạn chế ĐCLN, đảm bảo sự tin cậy của thông tin cung cấp
166 trang |
Chia sẻ: tueminh09 | Ngày: 07/02/2022 | Lượt xem: 525 | Lượt tải: 1
Bạn đang xem trước 20 trang tài liệu Luận án Nghiên cứu các nhân tố tác động đến hành vi điều chỉnh lợi nhuận tại các công ty phi tài chính niêm yết trên thị trường chứng khoán Việt Nam, để xem tài liệu hoàn chỉnh bạn click vào nút DOWNLOAD ở trên
unting, Vo1, No.2, pp 89-116.
8. Alsharairi M. and Salama, A. (2012), ‘Does high leverage impact earnings
management? Evidence from non-cash mergers and acquisitions’, Journal of
Financial and Economic Practice, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp.17-33.
9. Alves S. (2012), ‘Ownership structure and earnings management: evidence
from Portugal’, Australian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, Vol. 6,
No 1, pp. 57-74.
10. An Y. (2015), ‘Does foreign ownership increase financial reporting quality?’,
Asian academy of management journal, Vol.20, No.2, pp.81-101.
11. Ardison K. M. M., Martinez A.L. and Galdi F.C. (2012), ‘The effect of
leverage on earnings management in Brazil’, Advances in Scientific and
Applied Accounting, Vol.5, No. 3, pp. 305-324.
130
12. Asean Corporate Governance score card country reports and assessment 2014
(Joint initiative of The Asean Capital Markets Forum and The Asian
Development Bank)
13. Ashton, D., Beattie, V., Broadbent, J., Brooks, C., Draper, P., Ezzamel, M.
and Stark, A. (2009), ‘British research in accounting and finance (2001–2007):
The 2008 research assessment exercise’, The British Accounting Review, Vol.
41, No.4, pp. 199-207.
14. Ball, R. and Brown, P. (1968). ‘An empirical evaluation of accounting
numbers’, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol.6, pp.159–178.
15. Barnea A., Haugen R.A. and Senbet L.W. (1981), ‘An equilibrium analysis of
debt financing under costly tax arbitrage and agency problems’, The Journal of
Finance, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 569 – 581.
16. Beasley, M. S. (1996), ‘An empirical analysis of the relation between the
board of director composition and financial statement frauds’, The Accounting
Review, Vol.71, No.4, pp.443-465.
17. Beatty, A., Ke B. and Petroni K. (2002), ‘Earnings management to avoid
earnings declines across publicly and privately held banks’, The Accounting
Review, Vol.77, pp. 547-570.
18. Beaver, W. (1968), ‘The information content of annual earnings
announcements’, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol.6, pp. 67-92.
19. Becker C., Defond M., Jiambalvo J. and Subramanyam K. R. (1998), ‘The
effect of audit quality on earnings management’, Contemporary Accounting
Research, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 1-24.
20. Beneish, M.D. (1999), ‘The detection of earnings management’, Financial
Analysts Journal, Vol. 5, No.5, pp. 24–36.
21. Beneish, M.D. (2001), ‘Earnings management: a perspective’, Managerial
Finance, Vol.27, No.12, pp. 3- 17.
22. Berle, A.A. and Means G.C. (1932), The modern corporation and private
property, New York 1932
23. Beuselinck C., Blanco B. and Lara J.M.G (2013), ‘The role of foreign
shareholders in disciplining financial reporting’, Working paper, Lille Catholic
University
131
24. Blazenko G. and Scott W.R. (1986), ‘A model of standard setting in auditing’,
Contemporary Accounting Research, pp. 68-92.
25. Bộ Tài chính (2012), Thông tư 121/2012/TT-BTC quy định về quản trị công
ty áp dụng cho các công ty đại chúng, ngày 26 tháng 7 năm 2012.
26. Bradbury M., Mak Y. and Tan S. (2006), ‘Board characteristics, audit
committee characteristics, and abnormal accruals’, Pacific Accounting Review,
Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 47-68.
27. Bricker R. and Chandar N. (1998), ‘On applying theory in historical
accounting researc’, Business and Economic History, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp. 486-
499.
28. Brinn, T., Jones, M. J., and Pendlebury, M. (1996), ‘UK accountants’
perceptions of research journal quality’, Accounting and Business Research,
Vol. 26, pp. 265-278.
29. Bùi Thị Thủy (2015), ‘Vai trò của thành viên hội đồng quản trị độc lập trong
các công ty cổ phần’, Tạp chí khoa học và đào tạo ngân hàng, số 163, tr. 2-9.
30. Bùi Xuân Hải (2006), ‘So sánh cấu trúc quản trị nội bộ của công ty cổ phần
Việt Nam với các mô hình điển hình trên thế giới’, Tạp chí khoa học pháp lý, số
6/2006.
31. Burgstahler, D., and I. Dichev. (1997), ‘Earnings management to avoid
earnings decreases and losses’, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 24,
No. 1, pp. 99–126.
32. Cadbury Report (1992), Report of the Committee on the Financial Aspects of
Corporate
33. Campos C.E., Newell.R.E. and Wilson G.(2002), ‘Corporate governance
develops in emerging markets’, McKinsey On Finance, pp.15-18.
34. Chan P., Ezzamel M. and William D. (1993b), ‘Determinants of audit fees for
quoted UK companies’, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Vol. 20
No. 6, pp. 765-786.
35. Charfeddine L., Riahi R. and Omri A. (2013), ‘The determinants of earnings
management in developing countries: A study in the Tusianan context’, The
IUP Journal of Corporate Governance, Vol. 12, No. 1
132
36. Chen G., Firth M., Gao D. and Rui O. (2006), ‘Ownership structure, corporate
governance, and fraud: evidence from China’, Journal of Corporate Finance,
Vol.12, pp. 424–448.
37. Chen X, Cheng Q and Wang X. (2010), ‘Does increased board independence
reduce earnings management? Evidence from recent regulatory reforms’,
Working Paper, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Chinese University of Hong
Kong.
38. Chen, K. Y., Elder, R. J., and Hsieh, Y. (2007), ‘Corporate governance and
earnings management: The implications of corporate governance best-practice
principles for Taiwanese listed companies’, Journal of Contemporary
Accounting & Economics, Vol 3, No. 2, pp. 73-105.
39. Cheng A., Wang J. and Wei S. X. (2014), ‘State Ownership and Earnings
Management around Initial Public Offerings: Evidence from China’.
40. Cheng Q and Warfield T (2005), ‘Equity Incentives and Earnings
Management’, Accounting Review, Vol. 80, No. 2, pp. 441-477.
41. Chow C.W. (1982), ‘The demand for external auditing: size, debt and
ownership influences’, The Accounting Review, Vol. 57, No. 2, pp. 272-91.
42. Chung H. and Kallapur S. (2003), ‘Client importance, non-audit services, and
abnormal accruals’, Accounting Review, Vol. 78, No. 4, pp. 931 - 955.
43. Chung, R., Firth, M. And Kim, J. (2005), ‘Earnings management, surplus-free
cash flow, and external monitoring’, Journal of business research, Vol.58, pp.
766-776.
44. Claessens, S. and Fan, J.P.H. (2002), ‘Corporate Governance in Asia: A
Survey’. International Review of Finance, Vol.3, pp.71-103.
45. Coarse R. H. (1937), ‘The Nature of the Firm’, Economica, Vol. 4, No. 16, pp.
386-405.
46. Cohen, D. A., Dey, A., and T. Z. Lys. (2005), ‘Trends in earnings
management and informativeness of earnings announcements in the pre- and
post-Sarbanes Oxley periods’, Working paper, Northwestern University,
Chicago, IL.
47. Collin S. Y., Tagesson T., Andersson A., Cato J., and Hansson K. (2009),
‘Explaining the choice of accounting standards in municipal corporations:
133
Positive accounting theory and institutional theory as competitive or concurrent
theories’, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol 20, No. 2, pp. 141–174.
48. Cormier D., Houle S. and Ledoux M.J. (2013), ‘The incidence of earnings
management on information asymmetry in an uncertain environment: Some
Canadian evidence’, Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and
Taxation, Vol.22, pp 26-38.
49. Dahlquist, M. and Robertson G. (2001). ‘Direct Foreign Ownership,
Institutional Investors and Firm Characteristics’. Journal of Financial
Economics, 59, 413-440.
50. Davidson S., Stickney C. and Weil R. (1987), Accounting: The Language of
Business, Seventh edition, Thomas Horton and Daughter, Arizona in Schipper
(1989).
51. DeAngelo L. (1981), ‘Auditor Size and Audit Quality’, Journal of Accounting
and Economics 3, pp.183-199.
52. DeAngelo L. (1986), ‘Accounting Numbers as Market Valuation Substitutes:
A Study of Management Buyouts of Public Stockholders’, The Accounting
Review, Vol. 61, No. 3, pp. 400-420.
53. Dechow P.M., Sloan R. and Sweeney A. (1995), ‘Detecting earnings
management’, The Accounting Review, Vol. 70, No. 2, pp. 193-225.
54. Dechow, P. and Skinner, D. (2000), ‘Earnings management: Reconciling the
views of accounting academics, practitioners, and regulators’, Accounting
Horizon, Vol. 14, pp. 235–250.
55. Dechow, P. M., Sloan, R. G., and Sweeney, A. P. (1996), ‘Causes and
consequences of earnings manipulation: An analysis of firms subject to
enforcement actions by the SEC’, Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol.13,
No.1, 1–36.
56. DeFond M., Francis J. and Wong T.J. (2000), ‘Auditor industry specialization
and market segmentation: evidence from Hong Kong’, Auditing: A Journal of
Practice & Theory, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 49-66.
57. Defond, M. L., and Jiambalvo J. (1994), ‘Debt covenant violation and
manipulation of accruals’, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 17,
pp.145-176.
134
58. Degeorge F, Patel J. and Zeckhauser R. (1999), ‘Earnings management to
exceed thresholds’, Journal of Business, Vol. 72, No. 1, pp. 1-33.
59. Dichev I.D. and Skinner D.J. (2002), ‘Large-sample evidence on the Debt
Covenant Hypothesis’, Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp.
1091-1123.
60. Ding Y., Zhang H. and Zhang J. (2007), ‘Private vs State Ownership and
Earnings Management: evidence from Chinese listed companies’. Corporate
Governance: An international review , Vol.15, No. 2, pp.223–238.
61. Dyreng, S., M. Hanlon, and E.L. Maydew, 2012. ‘Where do firms manage
earnings?’, Review of Accounting Studies, Vol.17, No.3, pp.649-687.
62. Erickson M., Hanlon M. and Maydew E.L. (2004), ‘How much will firms pay
for earnings that do not exist? evidence of taxes paid on allegedly fraudulent
earnings’, The Accounting Review, Vol.79, No.2, pp. 387–408.
63. Fakhfakh H. and Nasfi F. (2012), ’The determinants of Earnings Management
by Acquiring Firms’, Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, Vol 3, No 4, pp.
43-57.
64. Fama E. F., and Jensen M. C. (1983). ‘Agency Problems and Residual
Claims’, Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 26, 327-49.
65. Fama E.F., (1970), ‘Efficient capital markets: a review of theory and empirical
work’, The Journal of Finance, Vol. 25, pp. 383-417.
66. Fan, P.H. (Joseph), T.J. Wong & T. Zhang (2007), ‘Politically connected
CEOs, corporate governance, and post-IPO performance of China’s newly
partially privatized firms’, Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 84, pp.330-
357.
67. Fathi J. (2013), ‘The determinants of quality of financial information disclosed
by French listed companies’, Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, Vol 4,
No.2
68. Fern R. H., Brown B.C. and Dickey S.W. (1994), ‘An empirical test of
politically-motivated income smoothing in the oil refining Industry’, Journal of
Applied Business Research, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 92-100.
135
69. Francis J. R., Khurana I.K. and Pereira R., (2005), ‘Disclosure incentives and
effects on cost of capital around the world’, Accounting Review, Vol. 80, pp.
1125-1162.
70. Friedlan, J.M., ‘Accounting choices of issues of initial public offerings’,
Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol. 11, No.1, pp.1-31.
71. Gaffikin M. (2005), ‘Accounting research and theory: the age of neo-
empiricism’, Accounting and Finance Working Paper 05/07, School of
Accounting and Finance, University of Wollongong.
72. Ghosh S. (2011), ‘Firm ownership type, earnings management and auditor
relationships: evidence from India’, Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 26, No.
1, pp. 350-369.
73. Göksel A. (2013), ‘Examination of factors affecting earnings management
practices: Evidence from ISE’, International Conference on Economic and
Social Studies, Vol.1, No.1, pp. 129 – 148.
74. Gordon M., Horwitz B. and Meyers P. (1966), ‘Accounting measurements and
normal growth of the firm’, Research in Accounting Measurements
75. Gore P., Pope P. F., and Singh A. K. (2001), ‘Non-audit services, auditor
independence, and earnings management’, Working Paper, Lancaster
University.
76. Gumanti T.A. (1996), ‘Earnings management and accounting choices in initial
public offerings: Evidence from Indonesia’, Master thesis, Edith Cowan
University
77. Guo J., Huang P., Zhang Y. and Zhou N. (2015). ‘Foreign Ownership and
Real Earnings Management: Evidence from Japan’. Journal of International
Accounting Research: Fall, 14 (2), pp. 185-213.
78. Guo, F. and Ma, S. (2015). Ownership characteristics and earnings
management in China. The Chinese Economy: translation and studies, 48 (5),
372-395.
79. Hartono J. (2008), ‘Portfolio Theory and Investment Analysis’, Fifth edition.
London: BPFE
80. Haw, In-Mu, Daqing Qi, Donghui Wu, Woody Wu, and Greg Clinch (2005),
‘Market Consequences of Earnings Management in Response to Security
136
Regulations in China’, Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp.
95-140.
81. Healy P. M. (1985), ‘The effect of bonus schemes on accounting decisions’,
Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 7, pp. 85-107.
82. Healy P.M. and Palepu K.G. (2001), ‘Information asymmetry, corporate
disclosure, and the capital markets: A review of the empirical disclosure
literature’, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 31, pp. 405 – 440.
83. Healy P.M. and Wahlen J.M. (1999), ‘A review of the earnings management
literature and its implications for standard setting’, Accounting Horizons, Vol.
13, No. 4, pp.365–384.
84. Hirshleifer D. (1993), ‘Managerial reputation and corporate investment
decisions’, Financial Management, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 145-160
85. Hoàng Trọng và Chu Nguyễn Mộng Ngọc (2013), Thống kê ứng dụng trong
nghiên cứu kinh tế - xã hội, Nhà xuất bản thống kê, Hà Nội.
86. Holthausen R. W., Larckerd D. F. and Sloan R.G. (1995), ‘Annual bonus
schemes and the manipulation of earnings’, Journal of Accounting and
Economics, Vol.19, pp. 29-74.
87. Huang H.C. and Chiang Y.C. (2012), ‘Equity agency cost and
internationalization: The effect of revised accounting standards in Taiwan’, The
International Journal of Business and Finance Research, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp.
101-111.
88. Hunton, J. E., R. Libby, and C. Mazza. (2006), ‘Financial reporting
transparency and earnings management’, The Accounting Review, Vol. 81,
No.1, pp.135-157.
89. Huỳnh Thị Vân (2012), ‘Nghiên cứu hành vi điều chỉnh lợi nhuận ở các công
ty cổ phần trong năm đầu niêm yết trên thị trường chứng khoán Việt Nam’, luận
văn thạc sỹ, Trường Đại học Đà Nẵng, Đà Nẵng.
90. Islam M. A, Ali R. and Ahmad Z. (2011), ‘Is modified Jones model effective
in detecting earnings management? Evidence from a developing economy’,
International Journal of Economics and Finance, Vol 3, No. 2
91. Januarsi Y., Badina T. and Febrianti D (2014), ‘Leverage, corporate strategy
and earnings management: case of Indonesia’, International Journal on
137
Business Review, Vol., No. 2, pp. 54-60.
92. Jensen M. C., and Meckling W. (1976), ‘Theory of the firm: Managerial
behavior agency costs and ownership structrure’, Journal of Financial
Economics, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 305-370.
93. Jensen, M. C. (1986), ‘Agency Costs of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance,
and Takeovers’, American Economic Review, Vol. 76, No. 2, pp. 323-329.
94. Jensen, M., (1993), ‘The modern industrial revolution, exit, and the failure of
internal control systems’, Journal of Finance, Vol.48, pp.831–880.
95. Johari N. H., Saleh N.M., Jaffar R. and Hassan M. S. (2008), ‘The influence of
board independence, Competency and ownership on earnings management in
Malaysia’, Journal of economics and management, Vol.2, No.2, pp. 281-306.
96. Jones J. (1991), “Earnings management during import relief investigations”,
Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 29, pp. 193-228.
97. Kang, S. and Sivaramakrishnan, K. (1995), ’Issues in testing earnings
management and an instrumental variable approach’, Journal of Accounting
Research, Vol. 33, No.2, pp. 353 – 367
98. Kaplan R.S. and Atkinson A. (1998), Advanced management accounting, 3rd
Edition., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
99. Kaplan, R. S. and R. Roll (1972), ‘Investor evaluation of accounting
information: some empirical evidence’, Journal of Business, Vol. 45, pp. 225-
257.
100. Kasznik R. (1999), ‘On the occastion between voluntary disclosure and
earnings management’, Journal of Accounting research, Vol 37, No.1, pp.225-
257.
101. Key K. G. (1997), ‘Political cost incentives for eamings management in the
cable television industry’, Joumal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 23, pp.
309-337.
102. Khalil M.M.M. (2010), Earnings management, agency cost and corporate
governance: evidence from Egypt, PhD dissertation, University of Hull, UK
103. Kim Y., Liu C. and Rhee C.G. (2003), The effect of firm size on earnings
management, University of Hawaii.
138
104. Kothari S. P., Leone A. J. and Wasley C. E. (2005), ‘Performance Matched
Discretionary Accruals’, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 39, No. 1,
pp. 23-49.
105. Kothari S.P. (2001), ‘Capital markets research in Accounting’, Journal of
Accounting and Economics, Vol. 31, pp. 105–231.
106. Kumani P. and Pattanayak J.K. (2014), ‘The role of board characteristics as a
control mechanism of earnings management: A study of select Indian sector
companies’, The IUP Journal of corporate governance, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 58-
69.
107. Lê Hoài Nam (2014), Auditing and earnings management in New Zealand,
PhD dissertation, Victoria University of Wellington, NZ.
108. Lê Hoàng Tùng (2009), ‘Thành viên hội đồng quản trị độc lập, quy định và
thực tiễn’, Tạp chí nhà quản lý, số 68, T2/2009.
109. Lee B. B. and Choi B. (2002), ‘Company size, auditor type, and earnings
management’, Journal of Forensic Accounting, Vol. 3, pp. 27–50.
110. Lee C.J., Li L. Y & Yue H. (2006), ‘Performance, growth and earnings
management’, Review of accounting studies, Vol.11, No, 2, pp. 305-334.
111. Lee, K.W., Lev, B., Yeo, G. (2007), ‘Organisational structure and earnings
management’, Journal of Accouting, Auditing & Finance, pp. 293-331.
112. Lev, B. (1989), ‘On the usefulness of earnings and earnings research: lessons
and directions from two decades of empirical research’, Journal of Accounting
Research, Vol. 27, pp.153-201.
113. Li S. F. (2010), ‘Determinants of management’s preferences for an earnings
threshold’, Review of Accounting and Finance, Vol. 9, No.1, pp. 33-49.
114. Liberty, S.E., and Zimmerman, J.L. (1986), ‘Labor union contract negotiations
and accounting choices’, The Accounting Review, Vol. 61, No. 4, pp. 692-712
115. Liu S.D. and Skerratt L. (2014), ‘Earnings quality across listed, medium-sized
and small companies in the UK’, Brunel University, the British Accounting and
Finance Association, 2014 London conference, and the European Accounting
Association, 2014 meeting at Tallinn Economics and Finance Working Paper
Series.
139
116. Liu, Q. and Z. Lu (2007), ‘Corporate Governance and Earnings Management
in the Chinese Listed Companies: A Tunneling Perspective’, Journal of
Corporate Finance, Vol.13, No. 5, pp. 881-906.
117. Luật Doanh nghiệp (2014)
118. Marinakis P. (2011), An investigation of earnings management and earnings
manipulation in UK, Phd Dissertation, University of Nottingham UK
119. Matsumoto, D. A. (2002), ‘Management’s incentives to avoid negative
earnings surprises’, The Accounting Review, Vol. 77, pp. 483–514.
120. McNichols M. F. (2002), ‘Discussion of the quality of accruals and earnings:
The role of accrual estimation errors’, The Accounting Review 77 (Supplement),
pp. 61-69.
121. Morck R., Shleifer A. and Vishny R.W. (1988), ‘Management ownership and
market valuation: An empirical analysis’, Journal of Financial Economics, Vol.
20, pp.293– 315.
122. Mörec, B. (2012), ‘Do small companies have superior financial expertise or
are they just managing earnings?’, International Business & Economics
Research Journal, Vol. 11, No. 12, pp.1289-1298.
123. Mulgrew M. and Forker J. (2006), ‘Independent Non-Executive Directors and
Earning Management in the UK’, The Irish Accounting Review, Vol. 13, No. 2,
pp. 35-62.
124. Nassirzadeh F., Salehi M. and Alaei S.M. (2012), ‘A study of the factors
affecting Earnings Management: Iranian Overview’, Science Series Data
Report, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 22-27
125. Nelson M. W., Elliott J.A., and Tarpley R.L. (2002), ‘Evidence from auditors
about managers' and auditors' earnings management decisions’, The Accounting
Review 77 (Supplement), pp. 175-202.
126. Nguyễn Công Phương (2009), ‘Kế toán theo cơ sở dồn tích và quản trị lợi
nhuận của doanh nghiệp’, Tạp chí kế toán số 77, số tháng 4/2009.
127. Nguyễn Hồng Việt Thành, Nguyễn Văn Thịnh, Đỗ Quốc Thịnh và Nguyễn
Hoàng Lâm (2013), ‘Phân tích tâm lý nhà đầu tư trên thị trường chứng khoán
Việt Nam’, Đề tài NCKH, Trường Đại học Kinh tế TPHCM, TPHCM.
140
128. Nguyễn Hữu Ánh and Nguyễn Hà Linh (2016), ‘Applying Jones Model and
Its Reliability in Detecting Earning Management: Empirical Study of Listed
Companies in Vietnam’s Stock Market’, Proceedings of the 5rd International
Conference on Emerging Challenges: Partnership Enhancement. November
11th 2016, Ha Noi, Vietnam
129. Nguyễn Thị Diệu Linh, Hồ Thị Bích Hường, Trần Thị Ngọc Hương (2013),
‘Ảnh hưởng của sở hữu bởi nhà quản trị lên cấu trúc vốn và thành quả hoạt
động của các doanh nghiệp Việt Nam’, Đề tài NCKH, Trường Đại học Kinh tế
TPHCM, TPHCM.
130. Nguyễn Thị Phương Thảo (2011), ‘Ảnh hưởng của sự thay đổi tỷ suất thuế thu
nhập doanh nghiệp đến việc điều chỉnh lợi nhuận: Trường hợp các công ty cổ
phần niêm yết tại Sở giao dịch chứng khoán Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh’, Luận
văn thạc sỹ, Đại học Đà Nẵng.
131. Nguyễn Thị Thanh Phương (2013), ‘Phân tích các nhân tố ảnh hưởng đến
mức độ công bố thông tin trong báo cáo tài chính của các doanh nghiệp niêm
yết tại sở giao dịch chứng khoán thành phố Hồ Chí Minh’, luận văn thạc sĩ quản
trị kinh doanh, Trường Đại học Đà Nẵng, Đà Nẵng.
132. Nguyễn Thị Uyên Phương (2014), ‘Nghiên cứu việc điều chỉnh lợi nhuận
trong trường hợp phát hành thêm cổ phiếu của các công ty niêm yết trên thị
trường chứng khoán Việt Nam’, luận văn thạc sỹ, Trường Đại học Đà Nẵng, Đà
Nẵng.
133. Nguyễn Thúy Anh (2007), ‘Thông tin bất cân xứng – rủi ro tiềm ẩn’, Tạp chí
tia sáng, Bộ Khoa học – công nghệ.
134. Othman B. H. and Zeghal D. (2006), ’A study of earnings-management
motives in the Anglo-American and Euro-Continental accounting models: The
Canadian and French cases’, The International Journal of Accounting, Vol. 41,
pp. 406–435.
135. Peasnell K., Pope P. and Young S. (2003), ‘Managerial equity ownership and
the demand for outside directors’, European Financial Management, Vol. 9,
No. 2, pp. 231-250.
136. Perry, S.E., and Williams, T.H. (1994), ‘Earnings management preceding
management buyout offers’, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 18,
pp. 157-179.
141
137. Phạm Thị Bích Vân (2012), ‘Nghiên cứu các nhân tố ảnh hưởng đến hành
động quản trị lợi nhuận của các doanh nghiệp phát hành cổ phiếu ra công chúng
niêm yết trên sàn chứng khoán TPHCM’, Tạp chí khoa học và công nghệ, số 12
(61), quyển 3, tr. 151-159.
138. Phan Thị Thùy Dương (2015), Sử dụng Mô hình Jones để nhận diện điều
chỉnh lợi nhuận: Trường hợp các công ty niêm yết ở Hose phát hành thêm cổ
phiếu năm 2013, luận văn thạc sỹ, Trường Đại học Đà Nẵng, Đà Nẵng.
139. Poli S. (2013), ‘Small-sized companies’ earnings management: evidence from
Italy’, International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting, Vol. 3,
No. 2, pp. 93-109.
140. Press E. G. and Weintrop J.B. (1990), ‘Accounting based constraints in public
and private debt agreements’, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 12,
No.13, pp. 65 - 95.
141. Rahman K. and Shahrur H. (2008), ‘Relationship-specific investments and
earnings management: evidence on corporate suppliers and customers’, The
Accounting Review, Vol. 83, No. 7, pp 1041-1081.
142. Rahman R. A. and Ali F. (2006), ‘Board, audit committee, culture and
earnings management: Malaysian evidence’, Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol.
21, No. 7, pp. 783-804.
143. Rao, N., and Dandale S. (2008), ‘Earnings management: A study of equity
rights issues in india’, The Icfai Journal of Applied Finance, Vol. 14, pp. 20-34
144. Rath S. and Sun L. (2008), ‘The development of earnings management
research’, International review of business research papers, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp.
265-277.
145. Richardson R., Tuna I. and Wu M. (2002), ‘Predicting earnings management:
The case of earnings restatements’, Working Paper, University of Michigan
Business School.
146. Riley J. (2001), ‘Silver signals: Twenty-five years of screening and signaling’,
Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 39, pp. 432-478.
147. Ronen, J. and Yaari V. (2007), Earnings management: emerging insights in
theory, practice and research, Springer, United States.
142
148. Ross S. A. (1973), ‘The economic theory of agency: the principle’s problems’,
American Economics Review, Vol. 61, pp. 134-139.
149. Ross S. A. (1977), ‘The determination of financial structure: The incentive-
signalling approach’, The Bell Journal of Economics, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 23-40.
150. Sahlan L.A. (2011), ‘The Malaysian Listing requirements reforms and
Earnings Management practices of public Listed Firm’, The IUP Journal of
Corporate Governance, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 07-36.
151. Sarkar J., Sarkar S. and Sen K. (2008), ‘Board of directors and opportunistic
earnings management: evidence from India’, Journal of Accounting, Auditing
and Finance, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 517-551.
152. Schipper K. (1989), ‘Earnings management’, Accounting Horizons, Vol. 3,
No. 4, pp. 91-102.
153. Shamsul Nahar, A. (2001), ‘Characteristics of board of directors and audit
committees among Malaysian Listed Companies in Period leading to 1997
Financial Crisis’, Akauntan Nasional, Oct, 18-21.
154. Shen C.H. and Chih H.L. (2007) ‘Earnings management and corporate
governance in Asia's emerging markets’, Corporate Governance: An
International Review, Vol. 15, No. 5, pp. 999 - 1021.
155. Simon D., Teo S. and Trompeter G. (1992), ‘A comparative study of the
market for services in Hong Kong, Malaysia and Singapore’, The International
Journal of Accounting, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 234-240.
156. Siregar, S.V. and Utama, S. (2008), ‘Type of earnings management and the
effect of ownership structure, firm size and corporate governance practices:
Evidence from Indonesia’, International Journal of Accounting, Vol.43, No.1,
pp.1-27.
157. Spence M. (1974), Market signaling, Harvard University Press (Cambridge,
MA).
158. Spence M. and Zeckhauser R. (1971), ‘Insurance, Information and Individual
Action’, American Economics Review, Vol. 61, pp.380-287.
159. Stiglitz J. E. (1975), ‘The theory of “screening”, education, and the
distribution of income’, American Econmics Review, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 183-
199.
143
160. Stiglitz J.E. (1974), ‘Incentives and risk sharing in sharecropping’, Review of
Economics Studies, Vol. 41, pp. 219-255.
161. Tehrani R., Salehi M., Valipour H. and Lashky M. J. (2009), ‘The survey of
the political costs and firm size: Case from Iran’, Business Intelligence Journal,
Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 319-341.
162. Teoh, S., I. Welch, and T.J. Wong. (1998a), ‘Eamings management and the
Long-mn Underperformance of Seasoned Equity Offerings’, Joumal of
Financial Economics, Vol. 50, pp. 63-100.
163. Teshima and Shuto (2008), ‘Managerial ownership and earnings management:
theory and empirical evidence from Japan’, Journal of International Financial
Management & Accounting, Vol.19, No.2,pp.
164. Trần Minh Trí và Dương Như Hùng (2011), ‘Ảnh hưởng của tỷ lệ sở hữu quản
trị đến hiệu quả hoạt động của các công ty niêm yết trên sàn HOSE’, Tạp chí
phát triển khoa học và công nhệ, Tập 14, số Q2, tr. 116-124.
165. Trueman B. (1990), ‘Theories of earnings-announcement timing’, Journal of
Accounting and Economics, Vol.13, No. 3, pp. 285-301.
166. Võ Xuân Vinh (2014), ‘Cấu trúc sở hữu, hiệu quả hoạt động và giá trị doanh
nghiệp trên thị trường chứng khoán Việt Nam’, Phát triển và hội nhập, Số16,
Tập 26, tr. 28-31.
167. Warfield T. D., Wild J.J. and Wild K.L. (1995), ‘Managerial ownership,
accounting choices, and informativeness of earnings’, Journal of Accounting &
Economics (July), pp. 61-92.
168. Watts R.L. and Zimmerman J.L. (1978), ‘Towards a positive theory of the
determination of accounting standards’, The Accounting Review, Vol. 53, No. 1,
pp. 112-134.
169. Watts R.L. and Zimmerman J.L. (1979), ‘The demand for and supply of
accounting theories: The market for excuses’, The Accounting Review, LIV, pp.
273-305.
170. Watts R.L. and Zimmerman J.L. (1986), Positive Accounting Theory, p. 388,
Prentice Hall
171. Watts, R. L. (1997), ‘Corporate financial statements, a product of market and
political processes’, Australian Journal of Management, Vol. 2, pp. 53-75.
144
172. Watts, R. L. and Zimmerman, J. L. (1990), ‘Positive accounting theory: a ten
year perspective’, The Accounting Review, Vol. 65, No. 1, pp. 131-156.
173. Wolk H.I., Dodd J.L. and Rozycki J.J. (2008), Accounting theory, Thousand
Oaks, Calif: Sage.
174. Worldbank (2011). Retrieved from
VIETNAME0overnance0scrorecard.pdf
175. Worldbank (2013), Protecting investors rank:
176. Xie B., Davidson III W. N. and Peter J. D. (2003), ‘Earnings management and
corporate governance: The role of the board and the audit committee’, Journal
of Corporate Finance, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 295-316.
177. Yamey, B.S (1962), ‘Some Topics in the History of Financial Accounting in
England 1500-1900’, in W.T Baxter and Davison S., eds, Studies in Accounting
Theory, pp.14-43.
178. Yermack D. (1996), ‘Higher Market Valuation of Companies with a Small Board
of Directors’, Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 185-212.
179. Yoon S.S and Miller G.A. (2002), ‘Cash from operations and earnings
management in Korea’, International Journal of Accounting, Vol.37, pp.395-412.
180. Yoon S.S, Miller G. and Jiraporn P. (2006), ‘Earnings management vehicles
for Korean firms’, Journal of International Financial Management and
Accounting, Vol.17, No.2, pp. 85-109.
181. Yoon S.S. and Miller G. (2002), ‘Earnings management of seasoned equity
offering firms in Korea’, The International Journal of Accounting, Vol. 37, pp.
57-78.
182. Young S. (1999), ‘Sysematic measurement error in the estimation of
discretionary accruals: An evaluation of alternative modelling procedures’,
Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, Vol. 26, No.7, pp.833-862
183. Yue, H. (2004), ‘Essays on earnings management’, Phd Dissertation, Tulane
University
145
184. Zahra, S.A. and Pearce, J.A. II (1989), ‘Board of directors and corporate
financial performance: a review and integrative model’, Journal of
Management, Vol. 15, pp. 291-334.
185. Zamri N., Rahman R. A. and Isa N. S. M (2013), ‘The impact of leverage on
real earnings management’, Procedia Economics and Finance, 7, pp. 86-95.
186. Zhang Y., Uchida K. and Bu H. (2011), ‘Corporate governance, discretionary
accruals and earnings informativeness: Evidence from China’, 7th International
Conference on Asian Financial Markets, Japan.
146
PHỤ LỤC
PHẦN 1 – THỐNG KÊ MÔ TẢ VÀ CÁC MÔ HÌNH HỒI QUY
1. THỐNG KÊ MÔ TẢ CÁC BIẾN TRONG NGHIÊN CỨU (Phần 4.2.1)
stats | DA BOARD IDV DUAL OWN1 OWN2 AUDIT DEBT PERF SIZE
---------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mean | .0622665 5.488274 3.478424 .358818 25.34985 5.284867 .2209193 2.011072 .1199229 11.74471
max | 4.120416 11 10 1 96.72 88.69 1 18.08324 1.012039 13.95658
min | -5.525249 3 2 0 0 0 0 .3955182 -1.325104 10.0669
sd | .8035383 1.073705 1.18016 .4797662 25.1524 10.40599 .4149635 1.847667 .1606768 .6204424
p50 | .2203999 5 3 0 19.365 .3304412 0 1.461787 .118341 11.74503
N | 2132 2132 2132 2132 2132 2132 2132 2132 2132 2132
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. MỐI QUAN HỆ TƯƠNG QUAN GIỮA CÁC BIẾN (Phần 4.2.2)
Obs = 2.132
| DA BOARD IDV DUAL OWN1 OWN2 AUDIT DEBT PERF SIZE
-------------+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DA | 1.0000
BOARD | 0.1233 1.0000
IDV | 0.0712 0.6210 1.0000
DUAL | -0.0706 0.0296 -0.2420 1.0000
OWN1 | 0.0431 -0.1526 -0.1175 -0.1879 1.0000
OWN2 | 0.1134 0.2009 0.2159 -0.0331 -0.1002 1.0000
AUDIT | 0.2152 0.1243 0.1923 -0.1367 0.0349 0.2699 1.0000
DEBT | 0.1796 -0.0457 -0.1107 -0.0622 0.0850 -0.1476 0.0091 1.0000
PERF | 0.2156 0.0349 0.0093 0.0129 0.0711 0.0536 0.0383 -0.1418 1.0000
SIZE | 0.6421 0.2783 0.2214 -0.1319 -0.0050 0.2735 0.4756 0.2531 0.0653 1.0000
147
3. MÔ HÌNH HỒI QUY BÌNH PHƯƠNG BÉ NHẤT OLS (Phần 4.4.1)
Source | SS df MS Number of obs = 2132
-------------+------------------------------ F( 9, 2122) = 201.53
Model | 634.08649 9 70.4540544 Prob > F = 0.0000
Residual | 741.844466 2122 .349596826 R-squared = 0.4608
-------------+------------------------------ Adj R-squared = 0.4586
Total | 1375.93096 2131 .645673841 Root MSE = .59127
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DA | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
BOARD | -.0258019 .0161086 -1.60 0.109 -.0573922 .0057885
IDV | -.0208132 .0150058 -1.39 0.166 -.0502407 .0086144
DUAL | .0055569 .0292596 0.19 0.849 -.0518236 .0629373
OWN1 | .0007673 .0005319 1.44 0.149 -.0002759 .0018104
OWN2 | -.0032745 .0013447 -2.44 0.015 -.0059114 -.0006375
AUDIT | -.2059982 .0360996 -5.71 0.000 -.2767926 -.1352038
DEBT | .006084 .0076073 0.80 0.424 -.0088345 .0210025
PERF | .8878292 .0813929 10.91 0.000 .7282109 1.047447
SIZE | .9144636 .0261281 35.00 0.000 .8632242 .965703
_cons | -10.54117 .2894896 -36.41 0.000 -11.10889 -9.973462
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. KIỂM ĐỊNH GIẢ THUYẾT HỒI QUY VỀ ĐA CỘNG TUYẾN (Phần 4.4.1.)
Variable | VIF 1/VIF
-------------+----------------------
IDV | 1.91 0.523102
BOARD | 1.82 0.548400
SIZE | 1.60 0.624259
AUDIT | 1.37 0.731069
DEBT | 1.20 0.830384
DUAL | 1.20 0.832508
OWN2 | 1.19 0.837907
OWN1 | 1.09 0.916470
PERF | 1.04 0.959190
-------------+----------------------
Mean VIF | 1.38
148
5. MÔ HÌNH HỒI QUY ẢNH HƯỞNG CỐ ĐỊNH FEM (Phần 4.4.2)
Fixed-effects (within) regression Number of obs = 2132
Group variable: id Number of groups = 537
R-sq: within = 0.1462 Obs per group: min = 1
between = 0.4532 avg = 4.0
overall = 0.4059 max = 5
F(9,1586) = 30.17
corr(u_i, Xb) = 0.2466 Prob > F = 0.0000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DA | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
BOARD | -.0257797 .0185788 -1.39 0.165 -.0622212 .0106619
IDV | -.0084032 .0166888 -0.50 0.615 -.0411375 .0243312
DUAL | .0197668 .0324891 0.61 0.543 -.0439594 .083493
OWN1 | .0010505 .0007839 1.34 0.180 -.0004871 .0025882
OWN2 | -.0024483 .0013689 -1.79 0.074 -.0051334 .0002368
AUDIT | -.1309692 .0430246 -3.04 0.002 -.2153603 -.0465781
DEBT | .0690443 .0113604 6.08 0.000 .0467613 .0913272
PERF | .9760595 .0699422 13.96 0.000 .8388706 1.113248
SIZE | .5007864 .094372 5.31 0.000 .3156795 .6858934
_cons | -5.896365 1.093089 -5.39 0.000 -8.040417 -3.752314
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
sigma_u | .65380941
sigma_e | .34406603
rho | .78312389 (fraction of variance due to u_i)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F test that all u_i=0: F(536, 1586) = 8.73 Prob > F = 0.0000
6. KIỂM ĐỊNH GIẢ THIẾT HIỆP PHƯƠNG SAI KHÔNG ĐỒNG NHẤT (Phần 4.4.4)
Modified Wald test for groupwise heteroskedasticity
in fixed effect regression model
H0: sigma(i)^2 = sigma^2 for all i
chi2 (537) = 5.1e+34
Prob>chi2 = 0.0000
149
7. MÔ HÌNH HỒI QUY ẢNH HƯỞNG NGẪU NHIÊN REM (Phần 4.4.3)
Random-effects GLS regression Number of obs = 2132
Group variable: id Number of groups = 537
R-sq: within = 0.1365 Obs per group: min = 1
between = 0.5232 avg = 4.0
overall = 0.4568 max = 5
Wald chi2(9) = 812.25
corr(u_i, X) = 0 (assumed) Prob > chi2 = 0.0000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DA | Coef. Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval]
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
BOARD | -.0272518 .0165416 -1.65 0.099 -.0596726 .0051691
IDV | -.0096035 .0149065 -0.64 0.519 -.0388198 .0196128
DUAL | .0133176 .0291125 0.46 0.647 -.0437418 .070377
OWN1 | .000835 .000636 1.31 0.189 -.0004115 .0020815
OWN2 | -.0031801 .0012389 -2.57 0.010 -.0056084 -.0007518
AUDIT | -.1486697 .0379038 -3.92 0.000 -.2229598 -.0743796
DEBT | .0351117 .0088739 3.96 0.000 .0177193 .0525042
PERF | .9355094 .0654295 14.30 0.000 .80727 1.063749
SIZE | .9014415 .0412103 21.87 0.000 .8206708 .9822122
_cons | -10.51444 .468759 -22.43 0.000 -11.43319 -9.595693
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
sigma_u | .54814452
sigma_e | .34406603
rho | .71736142 (fraction of variance due to u_i)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. KIỂM ĐỊNH LAGRANGIAN MULTIPLIER (Phần 4.4.3)
Breusch and Pagan Lagrangian multiplier test for random effects
DA[id,t] = Xb + u[id] + e[id,t]
Estimated results:
| Var sd = sqrt(Var)
---------+-----------------------------
DA | .6456738 .8035383
e | .1183814 .344066
u | .3004624 .5481445
Test: Var(u) = 0
chibar2(01) = 1013.29
Prob > chibar2 = 0.0000
150
9. KIỂM ĐỊNH HAUSMAN (Phần 4.4.4)
---- Coefficients ----
| (b) (B) (b-B) sqrt(diag(V_b-V_B))
| fe re Difference S.E.
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
BOARD | -.0257797 -.0272518 .0014721 .0084585
IDV | -.0084032 -.0096035 .0012003 .007504
DUAL | .0197668 .0133176 .0064492 .0144225
OWN1 | .0010505 .000835 .0002155 .0004584
OWN2 | -.0024483 -.0031801 .0007318 .0005822
AUDIT | -.1309692 -.1486697 .0177005 .0203572
DEBT | .0690443 .0351117 .0339325 .0070932
PERF | .9760595 .9355094 .0405501 .0247163
SIZE | .5007864 .9014415 -.4006551 .0848986
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
b = consistent under Ho and Ha; obtained from xtreg
B = inconsistent under Ha, efficient under Ho; obtained from xtreg
Test: Ho: difference in coefficients not systematic
chi2(9) = (b-B)'[(V_b-V_B)^(-1)](b-B)
= 33.11
Prob>chi2 = 0.0001
10. KIỂM ĐỊNH GIẢ THIẾT VỀ HIỆN TƯỢNG TỰ TƯƠNG QUAN (Phần 4.4.4)
Wooldridge test for autocorrelation in panel data
H0: no first-order autocorrelation
F( 1, 375) = 15.772
Prob > F = 0.0001
151
11. MÔ HÌNH HỒI QUY ẢNH HƯỞNG CỐ ĐỊNH (SE VỮNG)
(Sau khi loại IDV)
Fixed-effects (within) regression Number of obs = 2132
Group variable: id Number of groups = 537
R-sq: within = 0.1460 Obs per group: min = 1
between = 0.4539 avg = 4.0
overall = 0.4060 max = 5
F(8,536) = 10.51
corr(u_i, Xb) = 0.2487 Prob > F = 0.0000
(Std. Err. adjusted for 537 clusters in id)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Robust
DA | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
BOARD | -.0309191 .0155239 -1.99 0.047 -.0614143 -.0004239
DUAL | .0241073 .0294792 0.82 0.414 -.0338015 .0820162
OWN1 | .0010356 .0005792 1.79 0.074 -.0001022 .0021734
OWN2 | -.0024379 .0014087 -1.73 0.084 -.0052051 .0003292
AUDIT | -.1309162 .0542869 -2.41 0.016 -.2375574 -.0242751
DEBT | .0692234 .0139358 4.97 0.000 .041848 .0965989
PERF | .9751293 .1179378 8.27 0.000 .7434523 1.206806
SIZE | .4993426 .1518575 3.29 0.001 .2010337 .7976515
_cons | -5.881925 1.75795 -3.35 0.001 -9.335241 -2.428609
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
sigma_u | .65393904
sigma_e | .3439851
rho | .7832711 (fraction of variance due to u_i)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
152
12. MÔ HÌNH HỒI QUY ẢNH HƯỞNG CỐ ĐỊNH (SE VỮNG) (Phần 4.4.5)
(Sau khi loại IDV, DUAL)
Fixed-effects (within) regression Number of obs = 2132
Group variable: id Number of groups = 537
R-sq: within = 0.1457 Obs per group: min = 1
between = 0.4543 avg = 4.0
overall = 0.4057 max = 5
F(7,536) = 11.83
corr(u_i, Xb) = 0.2471 Prob > F = 0.0000
(Std. Err. adjusted for 537 clusters in id)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Robust
DA | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
BOARD | -.0311659 .0155145 -2.01 0.045 -.0616426 -.0006893
OWN1 | .00099 .0005814 1.70 0.089 -.0001522 .0021322
OWN2 | -.0024879 .0014037 -1.77 0.077 -.0052454 .0002696
AUDIT | -.1322678 .054387 -2.43 0.015 -.2391056 -.0254299
DEBT | .0693064 .0139764 4.96 0.000 .0418512 .0967616
PERF | .9779579 .1177653 8.30 0.000 .7466197 1.209296
SIZE | .4985939 .1519674 3.28 0.001 .2000691 .7971186
_cons | -5.861913 1.76066 -3.33 0.001 -9.320554 -2.403272
-------------+----------------------------------------------------------------
sigma_u | .65358301
sigma_e | .34394097
rho | .78312973 (fraction of variance due to u_i)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
153
PHẦN 2 –KẾT QUẢ THỰC HIỆN PHÂN TÍCH ĐƠN BIẾN (Phần 4.3)
Biến DA được chia ra 2 nhóm: DA dương POS, gán giá trị = 1
DA âm NEG, gán giá trị = 0
1. PHÂN TÍCH SỰ KHÁC BIỆT VỀ DEBT TRONG NHÓM DA (+) VÀ DA (-)
Two-sample t test with unequal variances
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group | Obs Mean Std. Err. Std. Dev. [95% Conf. Interval]
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
0 | 617 1.544033 .0607943 1.510099 1.424644 1.663422
1 | 1515 2.201279 .0497665 1.937061 2.103661 2.298898
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
combined | 2132 2.011072 .0400157 1.847667 1.932599 2.089546
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
diff | -.6572461 .0785662 -.8113615 -.5031307
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
diff = mean(0) - mean(1) t = -8.3655
Ho: diff = 0 Satterthwaite's degrees of freedom = 1452.77
Ha: diff 0
Pr(T |t|) = 0.0000 Pr(T > t) = 1.0000
2. PHÂN TÍCH SỰ KHÁC BIỆT VỀ PERF TRONG NHÓM DA (+) VÀ DA (-)
Two-sample t test with unequal variances
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group | Obs Mean Std. Err. Std. Dev. [95% Conf. Interval]
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
0 | 617 .0791913 .0076514 .1900565 .0641653 .0942172
1 | 1515 .1365113 .0036955 .1438403 .1292624 .1437601
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
combined | 2132 .1199229 .0034798 .1606768 .1130986 .1267471
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
diff | -.05732 .0084971 -.073996 -.040644
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
diff = mean(0) - mean(1) t = -6.7458
Ho: diff = 0 Satterthwaite's degrees of freedom = 916.621
Ha: diff 0
Pr(T |t|) = 0.0000 Pr(T > t) = 1.0000
154
3. PHÂN TÍCH SỰ KHÁC BIỆT VỀ SIZE TRONG NHÓM DA (+) VÀ DA (-)
Two-sample t test with unequal variances
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group | Obs Mean Std. Err. Std. Dev. [95% Conf. Interval]
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
0 | 617 11.1415 .0178079 .4423394 11.10653 11.17648
1 | 1515 11.99037 .0129366 .5035319 11.965 12.01575
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
combined | 2132 11.74471 .0134372 .6204424 11.71836 11.77106
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
diff | -.8488688 .0220109 -.8920497 -.8056878
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
diff = mean(0) - mean(1) t = -38.5659
Ho: diff = 0 Satterthwaite's degrees of freedom = 1291.39
Ha: diff 0
Pr(T |t|) = 0.0000 Pr(T > t) = 1.0000
4. PHÂN TÍCH SỰ KHÁC BIỆT VỀ BOARD TRONG NHÓM DA (+) VÀ DA (-)
Two-sample t test with unequal variances
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group | Obs Mean Std. Err. Std. Dev. [95% Conf. Interval]
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
0 | 617 5.23825 .0318675 .7915722 5.175667 5.300832
1 | 1515 5.590099 .02965 1.154067 5.53194 5.648258
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
combined | 2132 5.488274 .0232537 1.073705 5.442672 5.533876
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
diff | -.3518494 .0435277 -.437225 -.2664738
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
diff = mean(0) - mean(1) t = -8.0833
Ho: diff = 0 Satterthwaite's degrees of freedom = 1643.13
Ha: diff 0
Pr(T |t|) = 0.0000 Pr(T > t) = 1.0000
155
5. PHÂN TÍCH SỰ KHÁC BIỆT VỀ IDV TRONG NHÓM DA (+) VÀ DA (-)
Two-sample t test with unequal variances
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group | Obs Mean Std. Err. Std. Dev. [95% Conf. Interval]
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
0 | 617 3.298217 .0391696 .9729524 3.221295 3.375139
1 | 1515 3.551815 .0320539 1.247635 3.48894 3.61469
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
combined | 2132 3.478424 .0255592 1.18016 3.4283 3.528548
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
diff | -.253598 .0506134 -.3528811 -.1543149
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
diff = mean(0) - mean(1) t = -5.0105
Ho: diff = 0 Satterthwaite's degrees of freedom = 1452.3
Ha: diff 0
Pr(T |t|) = 0.0000 Pr(T > t) = 1.0000
6. PHÂN TÍCH SỰ KHÁC BIỆT VỀ OWN1 TRONG NHÓM DA (+) VÀ DA (-)
Two-sample t test with unequal variances
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group | Obs Mean Std. Err. Std. Dev. [95% Conf. Interval]
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
0 | 617 23.83442 .9306163 23.11603 22.00686 25.66199
1 | 1515 25.96703 .6658756 25.91787 24.66089 27.27316
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
combined | 2132 25.34985 .5447357 25.1524 24.28158 26.41812
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
diff | -2.132606 1.144306 -4.37754 .1123288
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
diff = mean(0) - mean(1) t = -1.8637
Ho: diff = 0 Satterthwaite's degrees of freedom = 1272.5
Ha: diff 0
Pr(T |t|) = 0.0626 Pr(T > t) = 0.9687
156
7. PHÂN TÍCH SỰ KHÁC BIỆT VỀ OWN2 TRONG NHÓM DA (+) VÀ DA (-)
Two-sample t test with unequal variances
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group | Obs Mean Std. Err. Std. Dev. [95% Conf. Interval]
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
0 | 617 2.656798 .2341729 5.816735 2.196924 3.116672
1 | 1515 6.355176 .2981646 11.60546 5.770317 6.940035
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
combined | 2132 5.284867 .2253668 10.40599 4.842905 5.726829
---------+--------------------------------------------------------------------
diff | -3.698378 .3791294 -4.441898 -2.954858
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
diff = mean(0) - mean(1) t = -9.7549
Ho: diff = 0 Satterthwaite's degrees of freedom = 2045.24
Ha: diff 0
Pr(T |t|) = 0.0000 Pr(T > t) = 1.0000
8. PHÂN TÍCH SỰ KHÁC BIỆT VỀ DUAL TRONG NHÓM DA (+) VÀ DA (-)
| DUAL
DA | 0.00 1.00 | Total
-----------+----------------------+----------
0 | 356 261 | 617
| 26.04 34.12 | 28.94
-----------+----------------------+----------
1 | 1,011 504 | 1,515
| 73.96 65.88 | 71.06
-----------+----------------------+----------
Total | 1,367 765 | 2,132
| 100 100 | 100.00
Pearson chi2(1) = 15.5535 Pr = 0.000
9. PHÂN TÍCH SỰ KHÁC BIỆT VỀ AUDIT TRONG NHÓM DA (+) VÀ DA (-)
| AUDIT
DA | 0.00 1.00 | Total
-----------+----------------------+----------
0 | 579 38 | 617
| 34.86 8.07 | 28.94
-----------+----------------------+----------
1 | 1,082 433 | 1,515
| 65.14 91.93 | 71.06
-----------+----------------------+----------
Total | 1,661 471 | 2,132
| 100 100 | 100.00
Pearson chi2(1) = 128.0690 Pr = 0.000