英语论文网

& in parentheses

* Significant at 10% level (1-tailed test); * * Significant at 5% level (1-tailed test);

* * * Significant at 1% level (1-tailed test)

Multivariate Analysis

Table 10

Multiple Regression Results of Companies’ resources, the Interaction of Ownership Structures on the Extent of CSR Disclosures for 2006

Dependent Variable: CSRD(CSR Disclosure)

R Square = 0.369, Adjusted R2 = 0.348, F = 17.05, Sig. = 0.000

Coefficient for each variable is shown with t – statistics in parentheses

* Significant at 10% level (1-tailed test); * * Significant at 5% level (1-tailed test);

* * * Significant at 1% level (1-tailed test)

Table 11

Multiple Regression Results of Companies’ Resources, Ownership Structures and CSR Disclosures for 2007

Dependent Variable: CSRD(CSR Disclosure)

R Square = 0.351, Adjusted R2 = 0.328, F = 15.73, Sig. = 0.000

Coefficient for each variable is shown with t – statistics in parentheses

* Significant at 10% level (1-tailed test); * * Significant at 5% level (1-tailed test);

* * * Significant at 1% level (1-tailed test)

Table 12

Multiple Regression Results of Companies’ Resources, Ownership Structures and CSR Disclosures for 2008

Dependent Variable: CSRD(CSR Disclosure)

R Square = 0.301, Adjusted R2 = 0.277, F = 12.556, Sig. = 0.000

Coefficient for each variable is shown with t – statistics in parentheses

* Significant at 10% level (1-tailed test); * * Significant at 5% level (1-tailed test);

* * * Significant at 1% level (1-tailed test)

The results of the multiple regression analysis from Tables 10 to 12 showed that the F statistics were 17.054, 15.730 and 12.556 in 2006, 2007 and 2008 respectively. The adjusted R2 value was 0.348, while the p-value was significant for 2006. This adjusted R2 value suggested that the amount of variability in the CSR disclosure in 2006 as explained by the independent variable was about 34.8 percent and it reduced to 32.8 percent and 27.7 percent in 2007 and 2008 respectively, which was within the range of the adjusted R2 reported by previous studies (Darus et al., (2009) 0.419; Mohd Ghazali (2007) 0.27; Haniffa & Cooke (2005) 0.389 in the 1996 disclosure and 0.453 in the 2002 disclosure).

Hypothesis H1a predicts that intangible assets are significantly positively related to the extent of CSR disclosure. The results of the regression analysis as presented in Tables 10 did not support the relationship between the companies’ intangible resources and CSR disclosures in 2006 which is hypothesised to have a significant positive relationship. The results in Table 10 showed that the relationship between the intangible assets and CSR disclosures was not significant with the p-value of .338. This result was consistent with those in previous studies (Abdul Rahman & Atan, 2002; Mohamad & Ahmad, 2002; Halme & Huse, 1997) which found that firm size was not significant with the extent of CSR disclosures (Mohamed Zain & Janggu, 2006). Ahmad et al. (2003) also did not find any significant relationship between voluntary environmental disclosure and companies’ total assets. This might be due to the fa