Table 2.

Top ten papers pre-2019 ranked by number of citations per year

StudiesTheoretical frameworkTopicsAimType of EMEM modelFindingsSettingCPY/TC
Ali et al. (2007) Agency theoryFamily ownershipTo examine how the agency conflicts of family firms influence earnings qualityAEMKothari et al. (2005) Earnings are of superior quality in FF than in non-FF. This difference is ascribable to FF with a founder CEO and FF without dual-class sharesUSA (1998–2002)CPY: 37.78
TC: 680
Wang (2006) Entrenchment effect theory; alignment effect theoryFamily ownershipTo investigate the association between founding family ownership and earnings qualityAEMDechow and Dichev (2002); Ball and Shivakumar (2005) Founding family ownership is associated with lower AEM, greater earnings informativeness and lower persistence of transitory loss components in earningsUSA (1994–2002)CPY: 33.84
TC: 643
Sáenz González and García-Meca (2014) Agency theoryCorporate governanceTo examine the relationship between various attributes of corporate governance and EMAEMModified Jones model by Dechow et al. (1995) Internal ownership, ownership concentration, number of board meetings and independent directors lower EM. Conversely, larger boards increase EM. Family ownership, institutional ownership and CEO duality do not influence EMArgentina, Brazil, Chile and Mexico (2006–2009)CPY: 22.45
TC: 247
Jaggi et al. (2009) Agency theoryBoard independenceTo verify the relationship between board independence and EM, controlling for the moderating effect of family ownershipAEMAEM: Kothari et al. (2005) Board independence positively influences earning quality, but family control and the presence of family members on the board mitigates this effectHong Kong (1998–2000)CPY: 22.19
TC: 355
Achleitner et al. (2014) SEWFamily ownershipTo investigate the effects of family companies on REM and AEMAEM/REMAEM: Dechow and Dichev (2002); Ball and Shivakumar (2005)
REM: Roychowdhury (2006) 
FF are less engaged in REM than non-FF, but they show more negative discretionary accrualsGermany (1998–2008)CPY: 17.36
TC: 191
Martin et al. (2016) Agency theory; SEWCorporate governanceTo analyze
EM behavior in family and nonfamily firms and within family firms
AEMModified Jones model by Dechow et al. (1995) FF engage less in EM than non-FF. The use of EM is lower in founder family firms. The positive family effect on earning quality is amplified by CEO tenure, while it is weaker in larger companies and in those with a dual-class stock structureUSA (1992–1999)CPY: 14.56
TC: 131
Cascino et al. (2010) Entrenchment effect theory; alignment effect theoryFamily ownershipTo analyze accounting quality in family firms as well as the determinants of accounting quality in family and nonfamily businessesAEMDechow and Dichev (2002) model in the McNichols (2002) versionFinancial information is of better quality FF than in non-FF, and the determinants of accounting quality are different in FF than in non-FFItaly (1998–2004)CPY: 14
TC: 210
Siregar and Utama (2008) Agency theoryFamily ownership/corporate governanceTo examine the underlying motives for EM: opportunistic behavior or efficient contractingAEMKasznik (1999) FF with higher family ownership and not belonging to a business group are more prone to use efficient EMIndonesia (1995–1996 and 1999–2002)CPY: 13.65
TC: 232
Stockmans et al. (2010) Agency theory; SEWCorporate governanceTo examine SEW motivations for EMAEMModified Jones model by Dechow et al. (1995) First-generation and founder-led private FF are more engaged in upward earnings managementFlanders (2000)CPY: 13.33
TC: 200
Chi et al. (2015) Agency theory; stewardship theoryBoard independenceTo investigate the relationship between FF and EM, controlling for the moderating effect of board independenceAEMModified Jones model by Dechow et al. (1995) FF are more prone to resort to EM than non-FF.
Board independence mitigates the positive relationship between FF and EM
Taiwan (2006–2012)CPY: 13.10
TC: 131

Source(s): Table created by authors

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal