Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 384

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Monitoring Intensity and Stakeholders’ Orientation: How Does Governance Affect Social and Environmental Disclosure?

Open access
Mallin, Christine, Michelon, Giovanna, Raggi, Davide·2013·Journal of Business Ethics
DOI 10.1007/s10551-012-1324-4
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10551-012-1324-4

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Research works printed but not linked: 62

  1. Abbott, W., & Monsen, R. (1979). On the measurement of corporate social responsibility: Self-reported disclosures as a method of measuring corporate social involvement. Academy of Management Journal, 22(3), 501–515. · DOI · Paper page
  2. Al-Tuwaijri, S., Christensen, T. E., & Hughes, K. E. (2003). The relations among environmental disclosure, environmental performance, and economic performance: A simultaneous equations approach. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29(5–6), 447–471.
  3. Belkaoui, A., & Karpik, P. G. (1989). Determinants of the corporate decision to disclose social information. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 2(1), 36–51. · DOI · Paper page
  4. Berle, A. A., & Means, G. C. (1932). The modern corporation and private property. New York: Macmillan.
  5. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley. · DOI · Paper page
  6. Bondy, K., Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). Multinational corporation codes of conduct: Governance tools for corporate social responsibility? Corporate Governance an International Review, 16(4), 294–311. · DOI
  7. Bowman, E. H., & Haire, M. (1975). A strategic posture toward corporate social responsibility. California Management Review, 18(2), 49–58. · DOI · Paper page
  8. Buckholtz, A. K., Brown, J. A., & Shabana, K. M. (2008). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. S. Siegel (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of CSR (pp. 327–345). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  9. Cespa, G., & Cestone, G. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and managerial entrenchment. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 16(3), 741–771. · DOI · Paper page
  10. Cho, C. H., Patten, D. M., & Roberts, R. W. (2006). Corporate political strategy: An examination of the relation between political expenditures, environmental performance, and environmental disclosure. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(2), 139–154. · DOI · Paper page
  11. Cho, C. H., Roberts, R. W., & Patten, D. M. (2010). The language of US corporate environmental disclosure. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 35(4), 431–443. · DOI · Paper page
  12. Coffey, B. S., & Fryxell, G. E. (1991). Institutional ownership of stock and dimensions of corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 10(6), 437–444. · DOI · Paper page
  13. Coffey, B. S., & Wang, J. (1998). Board diversity and managerial control as predictors of corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(14), 1595–1603. · DOI · Paper page
  14. Cowen, S. S., Ferreri, L. B., & Parker, L. D. (1987). The impact of corporate characteristics on social responsibility disclosure: A typology and frequency-based analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 12(2), 111–122. · DOI · Paper page
  15. Cox, P., Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2004). An empirical examination of institutional investor preferences for corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 52, 27–43. · DOI · Paper page
  16. David, P., Bloom, M., & Hillman, A. (2007). Investor activism managerial responsiveness, and corporate social performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28, 91–100. · DOI · Paper page
  17. Deephouse, D. L. (2000). Media reputation as a strategic resource: An integration of mass communication and resource-based theories. Journal of Management, 26(6), 1091–1112. · doi:10.1177/014920630002600602 · Paper page
  18. Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26, 301–325. · DOI · Paper page
  19. Fox, J. (2006). Structural equation modeling with the SEM Package in R. Structural Equations Modelling, 13(3), 465–486. · DOI · Paper page
  20. Freedman, M., & Jaggi, B. (1982). Pollution disclosures, pollution performance and economic performance. OMEGA, 10(2), 167–176. · DOI · Paper page
  21. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.
  22. Gales, L. M., & Kesener, I. F. (1994). An analysis of board of director size and composition in bankrupt organisations. Journal of business research, 30(3), 271–282. · DOI · Paper page
  23. Gillan, S. L. (2006). Recent developments in corporate governance: An overview. Journal of Corporate Finance, 12(3), 381–402. · DOI · Paper page
  24. Global Corporate Governance Forum. (2009). Corporate governance: The foundation for corporate citizenship and sustainable businesses. Washington DC: GCGF.
  25. Graves, S. B., & Waddock, S. A. (1994). Institutional owners and corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 37(4), 1034–1046. · DOI · Paper page
  26. Gray, R., Kouhy, R., & Lavers, S. (1995). Corporate social and environmental reporting: A review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability, 8(2), 47–77. · DOI · Paper page
  27. Guidry, R. D., & Patten, D. M. (2010). Market reactions to the first-time issuance of corporate sustainability reports: Evidence that quality matters. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 1(1), 33–50. · DOI · Paper page
  28. Guthrie, J., & Parker, L. D. (1990). Corporate social disclosure practice: A comparative international analysis. Advances in Public Interest Accounting, 3, 159–175.
  29. Hackston, D., & Milne, M. (1996). Some determinants of social and environmental disclosures in New Zealand. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, 9(1), 77–108. · DOI · Paper page
  30. Haniffa, R. M., & Cooke, T. E. (2005). The impact of culture and governance on corporate social reporting. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 24(5), 391–430. · DOI · Paper page
  31. Hillman, A. J., Cannella, J., & Paetzold, A. A. (2000). The resource dependence role of corporate directors: Strategic adaptation of board composition in response to environmental change. Journal of Management Studies, 37(2), 235–255. · DOI · Paper page
  32. Hillman, A. J., & Dalziel, T. (2003). Boards of directors and firm performance: Integrating agency and resource dependence perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 28, 383–396. · DOI · Paper page
  33. Hillman, A. J., Keim, G. D., & Luce, R. A. (2001). Board composition and stakeholder performance: Do stakeholder directors make a difference? Business and Society, 40(3), 295–314. · DOI
  34. Huse, M. (2003). Renewing management and governance: New paradigms of governance? Journal of Management and Governance, 7(3), 211–221. · DOI
  35. Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. M. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360. · DOI · Paper page
  36. Johnson, R., & Greening, D. (1999). The effects of corporate governance and institutional ownership on corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 564–580. · DOI · Paper page
  37. Koenig, T., & Gogel, R. (1981). Interlocking corporate directorships as a social network. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 40, 37–50. · doi:10.1111/j.1536-7150.1981.tb01370.x
  38. Lindblom, C. K. (1994). The implications of organizational legitimacy for corporate social performance and disclosure. Paper presented at the Critical Perspectives of Accounting Conference, New York.
  39. Luoma, P., & Goodstein, J. (1999). Stakeholders and corporate boards: Institutional influences on board composition and structure. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 553–563. · DOI · Paper page
  40. Mallin, C., & Michelon, G. (2011). Board reputation attributes and corporate social performance: An empirical investigation of the US Best Corporate Citizens. Accounting and Business Research, 41(2), 119–144. · DOI · Paper page
  41. McGuire, J., Dow, S., & Argheyd, K. (2003). CEO incentives and corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 45(4), 341–359. · DOI · Paper page
  42. Michelon, G., & Parbonetti, A. (2010). Stakeholder engagement: Corporate governance and sustainability disclosure. Journal of Management and Governance. doi: 10.1007/s10997-010-9160-3 . · DOI · Paper page
  43. Minichilli, A., Zattoni, A., & Zona, F. (2009). Making boards effective: An empirical examination of board task performance. British Journal of Management, 20, 55–74. · DOI · Paper page
  44. Mintzberg, H. (1983). Power in and around organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  45. Neubaum, D. O., & Zahra, S. A. (2006). Institutional ownership and corporate social performance: The moderating effects of investment horizon, activism, and coordination. Journal of Management, 32, 108–131. · DOI · Paper page
  46. Patten, D. M. (1991). Exposure, legitimacy, and social disclosure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 10(4), 297–308. · DOI · Paper page
  47. Patten, D. M. (1992). Intra-industry disclosure in response to the Alaskan oil spill: A note on legitimacy theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(5), 471–475. · DOI · Paper page
  48. Patten, D. M. (2002). The relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: A research note. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 27(8), 763–773. · DOI · Paper page
  49. Pfeffer, B. R., & Salancik, J. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.
  50. Provan, K. G. (1980). Board power and organizational effectiveness among human service agencies. Academy of Management Journal, 23, 221–236. · DOI · Paper page
  51. Pugliese, A., Bezermer, P., Zattoni, A., Huse, M., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, W. (2007). Board of Directors’ contribution to strategy: A literature review and research agenda. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 17(3), 292–306. · DOI · Paper page
  52. Roberts, R. (1992). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(6), 595–612. · DOI · Paper page
  53. Rodrigue, M., Magnan, M., & Cho, C. (2011). Greening or Greenwashing: Does environmental governance matter? Paper presented at the 3rd CSEAR Conference North American, Montreal, Canada.
  54. Sacconi, L. (2006). A social contract account for CSR as an extended model of corporate governance (I): Rational bargaining and justification. Journal of Business Ethics, 68(3), 259–281. · DOI · Paper page
  55. Selznick, P. (1949). TVA and the grass roots. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  56. Surroca, J., & Tribò, J. A. (2008). Managerial entrenchment and corporate social performance. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 35(5–6), 748–789. · DOI · Paper page
  57. Trotman, K., & Bradley, G. W. (1981). Associations between social responsibility disclosure and characteristics of companies. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 6(4), 355–362. · DOI · Paper page
  58. Ullman, A. (1985). Data in search of a theory: A critical examination of the relationship among social performance, social disclosure, and economic performance. Academy of Management Review, 10(3), 540–577. · DOI · Paper page
  59. Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance-financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303–319. · DOI · Paper page
  60. Zahra, S. A., & Pearce, J. A. II (1989). Boards of Directors and corporate financial performance: A review and integrative model. Journal of Management, 15(2), 291–334. · DOI · Paper page
  61. Zahra, S. A., & Stanton, W. W. (1988). The implications of Board of Directors’ composition for corporate strategy and performance. International Journal of Management, 5(2), 229–236.
  62. Zattoni, A. (2011). Who should control a corporation? Toward a contingency stakeholder model for allocating ownership rights. Journal of Business Ethics, 103, 255–274. · DOI

Cited by

See all 384

Metadata

Authors
Mallin, C., Michelon, G., & Raggi, D.
Venue
Journal of Business Ethics
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2012-04-26
Volume
114
Issue
1
Pages
29-43
ISSN
  • 0167-4544 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-0697
DOI
10.1007/s10551-012-1324-4
OpenAlex
W2030636555
Cited by
384
References
3
FWCI
21.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Monitoring Intensity and Stakeholders’ Orientation: How Does Governance Affect Social and Environmental Disclosure? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10551-012-1324-4
The paper
Mallin, C., Michelon, G., & Raggi, D. (2013). Monitoring Intensity and Stakeholders’ Orientation: How Does Governance Affect Social and Environmental Disclosure? Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1324-4

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.