SEEU Review vol. 5 Nr. 2 (pdf) - South East European University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Fitim Deari, MBA and Media Deari Table 2: Descriptive statistics of 18 Slovenian listed companies Variable Mean Std. Dev. Min Max Lev .4776516 .2209778 .103995 .990766 Tang .4586295 .1810682 .187142 .982299 Profit .0538372 .0427116 .001213 .1756 Size 10.61323 .5908027 9.318569 11.70373 Nondebtax .0389734 .0204049 .001561 .106546 Growth 39.37203 181.453 -35.70695 1338.776 A correlation analysis was performed to verify a possible association between and among the variables, in order to test whether there is any linear correlation between and among the variables. Collinearity explains the dependence of one variable to other. When variables are highly correlated they both express essentially the same information. In general, independent variables having collinearity at 0.70 or greater should not include in regression analysis. Table 3 and table 4 show that highest correlation value is -0.5278 for Macedonian listed companies, respectively -0.5700 for Slovenian listed companies. Hence collinearity should not appear problem in our regression analysis. Table 3: Correlation matrix-Macedonian listed companies Lev Tang Profit Size Nondeb Growth ttax Lev 1.0000 Tang -0.2770 1.0000 Profit -0.5278 0.0446 1.0000 Size 0.2113 -0.3253 0.0287 1.0000 Nondebttax 0.0036 0.3827 -0.1796 0.0106 1.0000 Growth -0.0997 -0.1293 0.4320 0.0669 -0.1458 1.0000 78
<strong>SEEU</strong> <strong>Review</strong> Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 Table 4: Correlation matrix-Slovenian listed companies Lev Tang Profit Size Nonde Growth bttax Lev 1.0000 Tang 0.2826 1.0000 Profit -0.5700 0.1160 1.0000 Size 0.3865 0.1441 0.1416 1.0000 Nondebttax -0.3507 0.0242 0.4091 0.2671 1.0000 Growth 0.1708 -0.0715 -0.0715 0.2146 0.0685 1.0000 To test hypotheses that we formulated above, we perform regression test. Results below (table 5 and table 6) show that while tangibility, profitability and non-debt tax shield are negatively correlated with leverage in Macedonian listed companies, profitability and non-debt tax shield are negatively correlated with leverage in Slovenian listed companies. But, growth and size are positively correlated for both, Macedonian and Slovenian listed companies. P>|t| provides an alternative approach to reporting the significance or regression coefficients. The figures in columns below (table 5 and table 6) give the probability of obtaining the corresponding t statistics as a matter of β 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 chance, if null hypothesis Ho: = 0 were true. A p-value of less than 0.01 means that the probability is less than 1 percent, which in turn means that the null hypothesis would be rejected at the 1 percent level; a p value between 0.01 and 0.05 means that the null hypothesis would be rejected at the 5 percent, but not the 1 percent level; and a p-value of 0.05 or more means that it would not be rejected at the 5 percent level (Dougherty, 2002). Usually, p-values of 0.05 or lower are considered low enough for researcher to be confident that the estimated is statistically significant. Table 5 shows that p-value of tangibility is 0.075. This means that there are only 750 in 10,000 chances that the true coefficient of tangibility is actually zero. So, the coefficient of tangibility implies that it is statistically significant at the 7.5 percent level. Thus, we can say that based on p-values, in our model for Macedonian listed companies just profitability is statistically significant, and rest determinants are statistically insignificant. This is verified also by t-statistics. Results in table 5 show that t-statistics for parameters estimated are lower than 2 in absolute values, except profitability. This is in conformity with rule 79
Page 1 and 2:
UNIVERSITETI I EVROPËS JUGLINDORE
Page 3:
Contents Foreword by the Editor in
Page 6:
UEJL për këshillat e tij në koh
Page 9 and 10:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 J
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 f
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 c
Page 19 and 20:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 j
Page 21 and 22:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 T
Page 23 and 24:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 a
Page 25 and 26:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 1
Page 27 and 28: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 c
Page 29 and 30: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 t
Page 31 and 32: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 e
Page 33 and 34: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 R
Page 35 and 36: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 T
Page 37 and 38: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 n
Page 39 and 40: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 a
Page 41 and 42: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 A
Page 43 and 44: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 w
Page 47 and 48: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 i
Page 49 and 50: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 M
Page 51 and 52: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 G
Page 53 and 54: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009
Page 55 and 56: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 L
Page 57 and 58: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 m
Page 61 and 62: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 t
Page 63 and 64: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 o
Page 65 and 66: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 g
Page 67 and 68: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 1
Page 69 and 70: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 A
Page 77: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 H
Page 83 and 84: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 S
Page 87 and 88: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 h
Page 91 and 92: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 H
Page 93 and 94: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 s
Page 97 and 98: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 m
Page 101 and 102: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 P
Page 103 and 104: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 I
Page 105 and 106: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 e
Page 109 and 110: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 C
Page 113 and 114: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 D
Page 115 and 116: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 g
Page 121 and 122: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 d
Page 123 and 124: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 R
Page 125 and 126: SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 S
Page 129 and 130:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 W
Page 131 and 132:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 M
Page 133 and 134:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 I
Page 135 and 136:
SEEU Review Volume 5, No. 2, 2009 9
Page 138 and 139:
138 Reviewers: Benjamin Keatinge Dr
Page 140 and 141:
Iranda Bajrami, MA kanë qenë të
Page 142 and 143:
Iranda Bajrami, MA a state of c
Page 144 and 145:
Iranda Bajrami, MA to read and use
Page 146 and 147:
Iranda Bajrami, MA Classrooms were
Page 148 and 149:
Iranda Bajrami, MA the characterist
Page 150 and 151:
Iranda Bajrami, MA Not all the t
Page 152 and 153:
Iranda Bajrami, MA reinforce studen
Page 154 and 155:
Iranda Bajrami, MA References 1. Am
Page 156 and 157:
Iranda Bajrami, MA Appendix A Facto
Page 158 and 159:
Iranda Bajrami, MA Appendix B Obser
Page 160 and 161:
Iranda Bajrami, MA 22. Classroom en
Page 162 and 163:
Iranda Bajrami, MA Appendix C Stude
Page 164 and 165:
Iranda Bajrami, MA 9. 10. 11. 12. 1
Page 166 and 167:
Iranda Bajrami, MA Appendix D Teach
Page 168 and 169:
Iranda Bajrami, MA 18. 19. 20. 21.
Page 170 and 171:
Iranda Bajrami, MA Consistent with
Page 172 and 173:
172 Reviewers: Prof. Dr. Kadri Sule
Page 174 and 175:
Mentor Hamiti, Visar Shehu and Agni
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
194 Reviewers: Prof. Dr. Robert Sch
Page 196 and 197:
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Gezim Xhaferi and
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
212 Reviewers: Prof. Dr. Selim Jusu
Page 214 and 215:
Fatmir Faiku, Haxhere Faiku, Murtez
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
show all

SEEU Review vol. 5 Nr. 2 (pdf) - South East European University

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?