Earnings management and cross listing: Are reconciled earnings comparable to US earnings?Π
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w9075333 →Countries where authors are citing Earnings management and cross listing: Are reconciled earnings comparable to US earnings?Π
This map shows the geographic impact of Earnings management and cross listing: Are reconciled earnings comparable to US earnings?Π. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Earnings management and cross listing: Are reconciled earnings comparable to US earnings?Π with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Earnings management and cross listing: Are reconciled earnings comparable to US earnings?Π more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Earnings management and cross listing: Are reconciled earnings comparable to US earnings?Π
This network shows the impact of Earnings management and cross listing: Are reconciled earnings comparable to US earnings?Π. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Earnings management and cross listing: Are reconciled earnings comparable to US earnings?Π.
About Earnings management and cross listing: Are reconciled earnings comparable to US earnings?Π
This paper, published in 2005, received 613 indexed citations . Written by Mark H. Lang, Jana Smith Raedy and Wendy M. Wilson covering the research area of Finance and Accounting. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Accounting (601 citations), Strategy and Management (333 citations) and Finance (156 citations).
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.
This paper is also available at doi.org/w9075333.