Effects of financial characteristics on accounting conservatism of listed companies in Vietnam stock exchange

Figures & data

Table 1. Summary of results of some previous studies on factors affecting accounting conservatism.

Factor	Research	Result
Growth opportunity	Sari (2020), Holiawati and Julianty (2017)	+
	Nuraeni and Tama (2019), Penman and Zhang (2002)	–
	Zahro (2021)	0
Return on equity	Mohammadi et al. (2013), Martani and Dini (2010)	0
	Mohammand Fawzi (2021)	+
	Abu Nassar & Mohammad Al Twerqi, Pandey (2004), Artiach and Clarkson (2013), Lara et al. (2011)	–
Sales growth	Goffar and Muhyarsyah (2022)	–
	Rahayu and Indra Gunawan (2018)	+
	Achyani and Lovita (2021)	0
Return on assets	Martani and Dini (2010)	–
	Mohammand Fawzi (2021), Octavia (2022)	+
	Goffar and Muhyarsyah (2022), Nur Solichah and Fachrurrozie (2019)	0
Capital intensity	Zahro (2021), Achyani and Lovita (2021), Putri et al. (2020)	+
	Sholikhah and Baroroh (2021)	0
Investment opportunity set	Sholikhah and Baroroh (2021), Murwaningsari and Rachmawati (2017)	+
	Goffar and Muhyarsyah (2022)	0
Financial distress	Kao and Sie (2016), Sari (2020), Pujiono et al. (2023)	+
	Meilinda et al. (2022)	0
	Herma et al. (2023), Chen et al. (2009), Sholikhah and Suryani (2020)	–
Financial leverage	Ge et al. (2019), Dang and Tran (2020), Octavia (2022), Pujiono et al. (2023)	+
	Meilinda et al. (2022), Nur Solichah and Fachrurrozie (2019)	0
	Khalifa et al. (2022)	–
Uncertainty environment	Cui et al. (2023), Hejranijamil et al. (2020)	+

Notes: (+) Positive effect, (-) Negative effect, (0) No effect.

Table 2. Sample selection.

Criteria	Amount
Total companies listed on HOSE and HNX on December 31st, 2021	751
Financial companies	(56)
Non-financial companies	695
Number of firms as sample	379
Number of year observation	5
Number of observations	1,895

Table 3. Measurement of independent variables.

Variable name	Symbol	Measurement	Source
Growth opportunity	GRO	$\frac{\text{ClP*NS}}{\mathrm{\text{TE}}}$	Zahro (2021), Chen et al. (2005)
Return on equity	ROE	$\frac{\text{ATR}}{\mathrm{\text{TE}}}$	Baroroh et al. (2020), Martani and Dini (2010)
Sales growth	GRS	$\frac{\text{NSale t}+\text{NSale t}-1}{\text{Nsale t}-1}$	Ahmed et al. (2002), Ahmed and Duellman (2007)
Return on assets	ROA	$\frac{\mathrm{\text{ATR}}}{\mathrm{\text{TE}}}$	Murwaningsari and Rachmawati (2017)
Capital intensity	CIN	$\frac{\mathrm{\text{TA}}}{\mathrm{\text{TSale}}}$	Zmijewski and Hagerman (1981), Baker and Wurgler (2002), Murwaningsari and Rachmawati (2017)
Investment opportunity set	IOS	$\frac{\text{BVFA t}-\text{BVFA t}-1}{\mathrm{\text{TA}}}$	Goffar and Muhyarsyah (2022)
Financial distress	ZCO	Z = 0.012X1+ 0.014X2+ 0.033X3 + 0.006X4+ 0.999X5 If Z > 2,99: ‘Safe’ Zone. If 1,8 < Z < 2,99: ‘Gray’ Zone. If Z < 1,8: Distress Zone. X1 = Working capital/Total assets X2 = Retained earnings/Total assets X3 = Earnings before interest and taxes/Total assets X4 = Market value equity/Book value of total liabilities X5 = Sales/Total assets	Wanjiao Jia et al. (2022)
Financial leverage	LEV	$\frac{\mathrm{\text{Tdebt}}}{\mathrm{\text{TA}}}$	Ge et al. (2019), T. G. Bryan et al. (2021), Nasr and Ntim (2018)
Global diversification	GDI	Dummy variable, equal to 1 if Foreign sales, otherwise 0	Denis et al. (2002), Bodnar et al. (1999)
Uncertainty environment	UOU	$\mathrm{\text{CV}}\left({\mathrm{z}}_{\mathrm{i}}\right)=\frac{{\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{\mathrm{i}=1}^5\sqrt{\frac{{\left({\mathrm{z}}_{\mathrm{i}}-\overline{\mathrm{z}}\right)}^2}{5}}}{\overline{\mathrm{z}}}$ zi: is the sales observation for each firm ineach year i $\overline{z}$ : is the mean sales value. Average revenue of 5 year t-4, t-3, t-2, t-1, t for the full current year.	Habib and Hossain, (2013), Ghosh and Olsen (2009)

Figure 1. Research framework.

Table 4. Descriptive statistics for the variables examined in the study.

Variables	Mean	Std. Dev	Min	Max
ACC_NAC	−0.053	0.442	−14.442	0.683
GRO	1.552	1.56	−17.787	22.384
ROE	0.122	0.272	−6.313	4.487
GRS	0.339	3.753	−0.994	127.458
ROA	0.072	0.084	−0.471	1.18
CIN	17.445	315.071	0.056	12606.456
IOS	0.001	0.067	−0.584	0.885
ZCO	1.248	0.0557	1	3
LEV	0.437	0.226	0.008	1.237
GDI	0.215	0.411	0	1
UOU	0.221	0.218	0.008	1.484

Table 5. Regression results of the Pooled OLS.

ACC_NAC	Coef	St.Err	t-value	p-value	[95% Conf	Interval]	Sig
GRO	−0.048	0.007	−7.12	0	−0.061	−0.035	***
ROE	−0.277	0.04	−6.87	0	−0.356	−0.198	***
GRS	0.002	0.003	0.88	0.377	−0.003	0.008
ROA	−1.051	0.152	−6.93	0	−1.348	−0.753	***
CIN	0	0	1.00	0.32	0	0
IOS	0.083	0.14	0.59	0.554	−0.191	0.357
ZCO	0.007	0.017	0.42	0.674	−0.026	0.04
LEV	−0.208	0.044	−4.72	0	−0.294	−0.121	***
GDI	0.041	0.023	1.80	0.073	−0.004	0.087	*
UOU	−0.296	0.048	−6.20	0	−0.39	−0.203	***
Const.	0.267	0.035	7.56	0	0.198	0.337	***
Mean dependent var			−0.053	SD dependent var		0.442
R-squared			0.163	Number of obs		1895
F-test			36.581	Prob > F		0.000
Akaike crit. (AIC)			1964.037	Bayesian crit. (BIC)		2025.053

*** p < 0.01, **p < 0.05, *p < 0.1.

Table 6. Comparison results between Pooled OLS and FEM model.

ACC_NAC	Coef	St.Err	t-value	p-value	[95% Conf	Interval]	Sig
GRO	−0.121	0.01	−12.14	0	−0.14	−0.101	***
ROE	−0.301	0.042	−7.14	0	−0.384	−0.218	***
GRS	0.003	0.003	1.06	0.29	−0.003	0.009
ROA	−1.735	0.194	−8.92	0	−2.116	−1.353	***
CIN	0	0	0.89	0.372	0	0
IOS	0.038	0.151	0.25	0.8	−0.259	0.336
ZCO	0.006	0.042	0.15	0.882	−0.076	0.089
LEV	−0.416	0.117	−3.55	0	−0.645	−0.186	***
GDI	−0.087	0.132	−0.66	0.508	−0.345	0.171
UOU	−0.21	0.088	−2.37	0.018	−0.384	−0.037	**
Const.	0.533	0.08	6.64	0	0.376	0.691	***
Mean dependent var		−0.053		SD dependent var.			0.442
R-squared		0.246		Number of obs			1895
F-test		49.191		Prob > F.			0.000
Akaike crit. (AIC)		1385.476		Bayesian crit. (BIC) 1446.493

*** p < 0.01, **p < 0.05, *p < 0.1.

Table 7. Comparison results between Pooled OLS and REM model.

ACC_NAC	Coef	St.Err	t-value	p-value	[95% Conf	Interval]	Sig
GRO	−0.048	0.007	−7.12	0	−0.061	−0.035	***
ROE	−0.277	0.04	−6.87	0	−0.356	−0.198	***
GRS	0.002	0.003	0.88	0.377	−0.003	0.008
ROA	−1.051	0.152	−6.93	0	−1.348	−.754	***
CIN	0	0	1.00	0.32	0	0
IOS	0.083	0.14	0.59	0.554	−0.191	0.357
ZCO	0.007	0.017	0.42	0.674	−0.026	0.04
LEV	−0.208	0.044	−4.72	0	−0.294	−0.121	***
GDI	0.041	0.023	1.80	0.072	−0.004	0.087	*
UOU	−0.296	0.048	−6.20	0	−0.39	−0.203	***
Const.	0.267	0.035	7.56	0	0.198	0.337	***
Mean dependent var			−0.053	SD dependent var			0.442
Overall r-squared			0.163	Number of obs			1895
Chi-square			365.834	Prob > chi2			0.000
R-squared within			0.223	R-squared between			0.128

*** p < 0.01, **p < 0.05, *p < 0.1.

Table

	Var	sd = sqrt(Var)
ACC_NAC	0.1949373	0.4415171
e	0.151283	0.3889512
u	8.57e-06	0.0029279

Table 8. Summary of Pooled OLS, FEM and REM model tests.

Test	Pooled OLS and REM	Pooled OLS and FEM	FEM and REM
F-Test		F (378,1506)=1.42 Prob > F = 0.0000
Breusch-Pagan test	Chibar2(01)=0.99 Prob > F = 0.1597
Hausman test			Not done
Conclusion	Select Pooled OLS	Select FEM

Table 9. Regression results FGLS estimate of model.

ACC_NAC	Coef	St.Err	t-value	p-value	[95% Conf	Interval]	Sig
GRO	−0.006	0.003	−2.23	0.026	−0.012	−0.001	**
ROE	−0.04	0.024	−1.64	0.1	−0.088	0.008
GRS	0.002	0.002	1.20	0.232	−0.001	0.005
ROA	−0.738	0.057	−12.92	0	−0.85	−0.626	***
CIN	0	0	0.44	0.657	0	0
IOS	0.047	0.011	4.18	0	0.025	0.069	***
ZCO	0	0.006	0.08	0.936	−0.011	0.012
LEV	−0.046	0.013	−3.65	0	−0.07	−0.021	***
GDI	0.01	0.007	1.45	0.147	−0.003	0.023
UOU	−0.103	0.016	−6.46	0	−0.134	−0.072	***
Const.	0.066	0.012	5.71	0	0.043	0.089	***
Mean dependent var			−0.053		SD dependent var		0.442
Number of obs			1895		Chi-square		381.190

*** p < 0.01, **p < 0.05, *p < 0.1.

Table 10. Summary of hypothesis testing results.

Hypothesis	Hypothetical content	Related theories	Expected	Results
H1	Growth opportunities has a positive effect on the accounting conservatism	Positive Accounting Theory	+	–
H2	Return on equity has a positive effect on the accounting conservatism	Signal Theory	+	0
H3	Sales growth has a positive effect on the accounting conservatism	Agency Theory	+	0
H4	Return on assets has a positive effect on the accounting conservatism	Agency Theory	+	–
H5	Capital intensity has a positive effect on the accounting conservatism	Positive Accounting Theory	+	0
H6	Investment opportunity set has a positive effect on the accounting conservatism	Signal Theory Agency Theory Positive Accounting Theory	+	+
H7	Financial distress has a negative effect on the accounting conservatism	Agency Theory	–	0
H8	Financial leverage has a negative effect on the accounting conservatism	Signal Theory Agency Theory Contractual Theory	–	–
H9	Global diversification has a positive effect on the accounting conservatism	Signal Theory	+	0
H10	Uncertainty environment has a positive effect on the accounting conservatism	Agency Theory	+	–

Notes: (+) Positive effect, (-) Negative effect, (0) No effect.

Table 11. Regression results FGLS estimate of model (ACC_MB).

ACC_MB	Coef	St.Err	t-value	p-value	[95% Conf	Interval]	Sig
GRO	0.415	0.005	84.05	0	0.405	0.424	***
ROE	−0.138	0.051	−2.72	0.007	−0.237	−0.039	***
GRS	−0.002	0.002	−1.37	0.17	−0.005	0.001
ROA	1.453	0.13	11.15	0	1.198	1.709	***
CIN	0	0	2.00	0.045	0	0	**
IOS	−0.033	0.034	−0.98	0.327	−0.1	0.033
ZCO	−0.005	0.006	−0.77	0.442	−0.016	0.007
LEV	−0.493	0.024	−20.69	0	−0.54	−0.446	***
GDI	0.013	0.01	1.30	0.192	−0.007	0.033
UOU	−0.064	0.022	−2.89	0.004	−0.107	−0.02	***
Constant	1.028	0.017	59.04	0	0.994	1.062	***
Mean dependent var		1.545	SD dependent var		0.898
Number of obs		1895	Chi-square		10335.583

*** p < .01, **p < .05, *p < .1.

Table A1. VIF value of independent variables.

	VIF	1/VIF
ROA	1.864	0.536
ROE	1.385	0.722
GRO	1.257	0.796
UOU	1.253	0.798
LEV	1.14	0.877
GRS	1.139	0.878
GDI	1.035	0.966
ZCO	1.029	0.972
CIN	1.025	0.976
IOS	1.006	0.995
Mean VIF	1.213

Source: Own elaboration.

Figure A1. Regression standardized residual.

Source: Own elaboration

Table A2. Heteroskedasticity test result.

Modified Wald test for groupwise heteroskedasticity in fixed effect regression model H0: sigma(i)^2 = sigma^2 for all i chi2 (374) = 2.0e + 06 Prob > chi2 = 0.0000

Source: Own elaboration.

Table A3. Autocorrelation test result.

Wooldridge test for autocorrelation in panel data H0: no first-order autocorrelation F (1, 373) = 0.523 Prob > F = 0.4701

Source: Own elaboration.

Sari, W. P. (2020). The effect of financial distress and growth opportunities on accounting conservatism with litigation risk as moderated variables in manufacturing companies Listed on BEI. Budapest International Research and Critics Institute (BIRCI-Journal) : Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(1), 588–597. https://doi.org/10.33258/birci.v3i1.812

 Google Scholar

Holiawati & Julianty, R. (2017). Tax incentives, growth opportunities and size of companies with conservatisme accounting applications. International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology, 3(3), 586–591.

 Google Scholar

Nuraeni, C., & Tama, A. I. (2019). Effect of managerial ownership, debt covenant, political costs and growth opportunities on accounting conservatism levels. International Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting Research (IJEBAR), 3(03), 263–269. https://doi.org/10.29040/ijebar.v3i03.591

 Google Scholar

Penman, S., & Zhang, X. (2002). Accounting conservatism, the quality of earnings, and stock returns. The Accounting Review, 77(2), 237–264. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2002.77.2.237

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Zahro, N. (2021 Growth Opportunity, Capital Intensity, and Accounting Conservatism: The Moderating Role of Managerial Ownership [Paper presentation]. Academic Internation Conference on Literacy and Novelty, KnE Social Sciences, 71–77

 Google Scholar

Mohammadi, M. H. K., Heyrani, F., & Golestani, N. (2013). Impact of conservatism on the accounting information quality and decision making of the shareholders and the firms listed on the Tehran stock exchange. International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, 3(3), 186–197. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARAFMS/v3-i3/129

 Google Scholar

Martani, D., & Dini, N. (2010). The influence of operating cash flow and investment cash flow to the accounting conservatism measurement. Chinese Business Review, 9(6), 1–6.

 Google Scholar

Mohammand Fawzi, S. (2021). Accounting conservatism and profitability of commercial banks: Evidence from Jordan. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8(6), 0145–0151. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2021.vol8.no6.0145

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Pandey, I. (2004). Capital structure, profitability and market structure: Evidence from Malaysia. Asia Pacific Journal of Economics and Business, 2(8), 78–91.

 Google Scholar

Artiach, T., & Clarkson, M. (2013). Conservatism, disclosure, and cost of capital. Australian Journal of Business, 4(9), 1–22. http://ssrn.com/abstract-1673516

 Google Scholar

Lara, J. M. G., Osma, B. G., & Penalva, F. (2011). Conditional conservatism and cost of capital. Review of Accounting Studies, 16(2), 247–271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-010-9133-4

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Goffar, A., & Muhyarsyah, M. (2022). The effect of managerial ownership, company growth, profitability, and investment opportunity set (IOS) on accounting conservatism. Budapest International Research and Critics Institute-Journal, 28474–28486. https://doi.org/10.33258/birci.v5i3.6934

 Google Scholar

Rahayu, SK., K., & Indra Gunawan, D. (2018). Factors influencing the application of accounting conservatism in the Company. KnE Social Sciences, 3(10), 180–197. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i10.3128

 Google Scholar

Octavia, D. M. (2022). The effect leverage, profitability, firm size and financial distress against accounting conservatism (Empirical study on Bank Sub-Sector Service companies Listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange in 2017-2020). Global Accounting Jural Akuntansi, 1(2), 71–84.

 Google Scholar

Nur Solichah and Fachrurrozie. (2019). Effect of managerial ownership, levarage, firm size and profitability on accounting conservatism. Accounting Analysis Journal, 8(3), 151–157.

 Google Scholar

Achyani, F., & Lovita, E. P. (2021). The effect of good corporate governance, sales growth, and capital intensity on accounting conservatism (empirical study on manufacturing companies listed on the indonesia stock exchange). Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Dan Keuangan Indonesia, 6(3), 255–267. http://doi.org/10.23917/reaksi.v6i3.17578

 Google Scholar

Putri, W. W. R., Tartilla, N., & Pamungkas, M. N. (2020). Analysis of the factors that affect the company’s accounting conservatism. The Accounting Journal of Binaniaga, 5(2), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.33062/ajb.v5i2.391

 Google Scholar

Sholikhah, Z., & Baroroh, N. (2021). The roles of capital intensity in moderating managerial ownership and investment opportunity Set (IOS) on accounting conservatism. Accounting Analysis Journal, 10(1), 25–31. https://doi.org/10.15294/aaj.v10i1.40114

 Google Scholar

Murwaningsari, E., & Rachmawati, S. (2017). The influence of capital intensity and investment opportunity set toward conservatism with managerial ownership as moderating variable. Journal of Advanced Management Science, 5(6), 445–451. https://doi.org/10.18178/joams.5.6.445-451

 Google Scholar

Kao, H. S., & Sie, P. J. (2016). Accounting conservatism trends and financial distress: Considering the endogeneity of the C-Score. International Journal of Financial Research, 7(4) https://doi.org/10.5430/ijfr.v7n4p149

 Google Scholar

Pujiono, Radityo, Enggar, Kusumaningtias, Rohmawati, Putra, & Rediyanto. (2023). An overview fair play regulation in England premier league: Accounting information for leverage and financial distress to conservatism. Cogent Business & Management, 1, 10, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2164996

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Meilinda , Sri, Susanti, Santi, Zulaihati. (2022). Impact of leverage and financial distress on accounting conservatism. Marginal: Journal of Management, Accounting, General Finance and International Economic Issues, 1, 2, 126 – 139. https://doi.org/10.55047/marginal.v2i1.367

 Google Scholar

Herma, W., Amir, H., & Hibar, P. R. (2023). Determinants of accounting conservatism. Global Financial Accounting Journal, v 7n(1), 14–27. https://doi.org/10.18551/rjoas.2020-12.03

 Google Scholar

Chen, S., Chen, X., Cheng, Q., & Hutton, A. (2009). Accouning conservatism and large shareholders: an empirical analysis Working paper, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, December.

 Google Scholar

Sholikhah, R. M. A., & Suryani, A. W. (2020). The influence of the financial distress, conflict of interest, and litigation risk on accounting conservatism. KnE Social Sciences, 222–239. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v4i7.6854

 Google Scholar

Ge, R., Seybert, N., & Zhang, F. (2019). Investor sentiment and accounting conservatism. Accounting Horizons, 33(1), 83–102. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-52250

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Dang, N. H., & Tran, M. D. (2020). Impact of financial leverage on accounting conservatism application: the case of Vietnam. Custos E Agronegocio on Line, 16(3), 137–158.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Khalifa, M., Trabelsi, S., & Matoussi, H. (2022). Leverage, R&D expenditures and accounting conservatism: Evidence from technology firms. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 84, 285–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2022.02.002

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Cui, X., Ma, T., Xie, X., & Goodell, J. W. (2023). Uncertainty of uncertainty and accounting conservatism. Finance Research Letters, 52, 103525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2022.103525

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hejranijamil, M., Hejranijamil, A., & Shekarkhah, J. (2020). Accounting conservatism and uncertainty in business environments; using financial data of listed companies in the Tehran stock exchange. Asian Journal of Accounting Research, 5(2), 179–194. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJAR-04-2020-0027

 Google Scholar

Chen, M., Cheng, S., & Hwang, Y. (2005). An empirical investigation of the relationship between intellectual capital and firms’ market value and financial performance. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 6(2), 159–176. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930510592771

 Google Scholar

Baroroh, N., Asrori, S., & A’yunin, Q. (2020). The implementation of accounting conservatism principle in Indonexia. Unicees 2018, 1072–1078.

 Google Scholar

Ahmed, A., Billings, B., Morton, R., & Harris, M. (2002). The role of accounting conservatism in mitigating bondholder–shareholder conflict over dividend policy and in reducing debt cost. The Accounting Review, 77(4), 867–890. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2002.77.4.867

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ahmed, A. S., & Duellman, S. (2007). Accounting conservatism and board of director characteristics: An empirical analysis. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 43(2-3), 411–437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2007.01.005

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Zmijewski, M. E., & Hagerman, R. L. (1981). An income strategy approach to the positive theory of accounting standard setting/choice. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 3(2), 129–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4101(81)90010-0

 Google Scholar

Baker, M., & Wurgler, J. (2002). Market timing and capital structure. The Journal of Finance, 57(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6261.00414

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Jia, W., Bi, S., & Du, Y. (2022). Director’s and officers’ liability insurance and accounting conservatism: empirical evidence from China. Managerial Auditing Journal, 37(8), 1091–1112. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-10-2021-3353

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bryan, T. G., McKnight, M. A., & Houmes, R. (2021). Accounting conservatism or earnings management: A study of the allowance for doubtful accounts. Corporate Ownership and Control, 18(3), 175–190. volume https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv18i3art14

 Google Scholar

Nasr, M. A., & Ntim, C. G. (2018). Corporate governance mechanisms and accounting conservatism: evidence from Egypt. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society, 18(3), 386–407. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-05-2017-0108

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Denis, D., Denis, D., & Yost, K. (2002). Global diversification, industrial diversification, and firm value. The Journal of Finance, 57(5), 1951–1979. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-1082.00485

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bodnar, G. M., Tang, C., & Weintrop, J. (1999). Both sides of corporate diversification: The value impacts of global and industrial diversification. Working paper Johns Hopkins University.

 Google Scholar

Habib, A., & Hossain, M. (2013). Accounting conservatism, environmental uncertainty and the capital structure. Corporate Ownership and Control, 11(1), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv11i1c1art1

 Google Scholar

Ghosh, D., & Olsen, L. (2009). Environmental uncertainty and managers’ use of discretionary accruals. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(2), 188–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2008.07.001

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Data availability statement

Data will be made available on reasonable request.