EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 214 (2020) E3S Web Conf., 214 (2020) 01031 References
Open Access
Issue
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 214, 2020
2020 International Conference on Energy Big Data and Low-carbon Development Management (EBLDM 2020)
Article Number 01031
Number of page(s) 6
Section Big Data Analysis Application and Energy Consumption Research
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202021401031
Published online 07 December 2020
  1. B. Dierynck, W.R. Landsman, and A. Renders, “Do Managerial Incentives Drive Cost Behavior? Evidence about the Role of the Zero Earnings Benchmark for Labor Cost Behavior in Belgian Private Firms, ” Social Science Electronic Publishing, Vol. 87, no. 4, pp. 1219-1246, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  2. C.X. Chen, H. LU, and T. SOUGIANNIS, “The Agency Problem, Corporate Governance, and the Asymmetrical Behavior of Selling, General, and Administrative Costs, ” Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 252-282. [Google Scholar]
  3. E. Noreen and N. Soderstrom, “The Accuracy of Proportional Cost Models: Evidence from Hospital Service Departments, ” Review of Accounting Studies, Vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 89-114, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  4. G.A. Akerlof, “The Market for ‘Lemons’: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism, ” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 84, 1970. [Google Scholar]
  5. H.G.A. Pfann, “Turnover and the Dynamics of Labour Demand, ” Economica, Vol. 63, no. 251, pp. 359-367. [Google Scholar]
  6. I. KAMA and D. WEISS, “Do Earnings Targets and Managerial Incentives Affect Sticky Costs?, ” Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 201-224. [Google Scholar]
  7. K. Calleja, M. Steliaros, and D.C. Thomas, “A note on cost stickiness: Some international comparisons, ” Vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 0-140. [Google Scholar]
  8. M.C. Anderson, R.D. Banker, and S.N. Janakiraman, “Are Selling, General, and Administrative Costs \”Sticky\”?, ” Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 47-63. [Google Scholar]
  9. M.L. Weidenmier and C. Subramaniam, “Additional Evidence on the Sticky Behavior of Costs, ” Social Science Electronic Publishing, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  10. N. Barberis, H. Ming, and T. Santos, “Prospect Theory and Asset Prices, ” Nber Working Papers, Vol. 116, no. 1, pp. 1-53, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  11. P.M. Jones, and E. Olson, “ The international effects of US uncertainty, ”J. International Journal of Finance and Economics, Vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 242-252, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  12. R. Balakrishnan, E. Labro, and N.S. Soderstrom, “Cost Structure and Sticky Costs, ” Journal of Management Accounting Research, no.forthcoming, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  13. R. Banker, D. Byzalov, S. Fang, and Y. Liang, “Cost Management Research, ” Social Science Electronic Publishing, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  14. R. Balakrishnan, E. Labro, and N.S. Soderstrom, “Cost Structure and Sticky Costs, ” Working paper (The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA), 2011. [Google Scholar]
  15. R.D. Banker, D. Byzalov, and L. (Tony) Chen, “Employment protection legislation, adjustment costs and cross-country differences in cost behavior, ” Journal of Accounting & Economics, Vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 111-127. [Google Scholar]
  16. R.D. Banker, D. Byzalov, M. Ciftci, et al. “The Moderating Effect of Prior Sales Changes on Asymmetric Cost Behavior, ” J.Journal of Management Accounting Research, Vol. 26, no. 2, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  17. S. Leduc and Z. Liu, “Uncertainty shocks are aggregate demand shocks, ” Vol. 82, pp. 20-35. [Google Scholar]
  18. S.R. Bakera, N. Bloomb, and S.J. Davisc, “Measuring Economic Policy Uncertainty, ” Social Science Electronic Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  19. T.G. Bali, S.J. Brown, and Y. Tang, “Is economic uncertainty priced in the cross-section of stock returns?, ” Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 126, no. 3, p. págs. 471-489, 2017. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.