The role of moderation activities the influence of the audit committee and the board of directors on the planning of the sustainability report

Figures & data

Figure 1. Research conceptual framework.

Table 1. Variable description

Information		Description
i	=	Company cross-section data
t	=	Company time series data
ROE	=	Profitability
TATO	=	Activity
SIZE	=	Company Size
AUDIT	=	Audit Committee
DIR	=	Board of Directors
CSR	=	Sustainability
α	=	Constant
β1, β2, β3	=	CSR variable regression coefficient, ROE, TATO, SIZE, AUDIT, DIR
є	=	Error

Table 2. Descriptive variable

Variables	Obs	Mean	Std. Dev.	Min	Max	p1	p99	Skew.	Kurt.
CSR	120	.235	.110	.033	.462	.033	.462	.465	2.314
AUDIT	120	3,492	.810	300	700	300	600	1,936	6.856
DIR	120	7.025	1,872	400	120	400	110	.604	2,549
TATO	120	.848	.697	.063	3.822	.077	3.38	1,891	6.98
ROE	120	.195	.259	−.180	1.451	−.002	1,400	3,742	17,224
SIZE	120	17,384	1.006	15.304	19,722	15,487	19,679	.361	2,760
AUDIT*TATO	120	2.805	2,093	.230	11,467	.364	10.139	1,711	6.366
DIR*TATO	120	5,983	5.526	.567	30,578	.613	23,658	2.185	7,812

Table 3. Pearson correlation test

Variables	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)		(7)	(8)
(1) CSR	1,000
(2) AUDIT	0.002	1,000
	(0.983)
(3) DIR	0.064	0.031	1,000
	(0.485)	(0.740)
(4) TATO	−0.091	−0.279	0.020	1,000
	(0.325)	(0.002)	(0.831)
(5) ROE	−0.256	−0.139	0.273	0.402	1,000
	(0.005)	(0.130)	(0.003)	(0.000)
(6) SIZE	0.257	0.477	0.483	−0.390	−0.189	1,000
	(0.005)	(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.039)
(7) AUDIT*TATO	−0.082	−0.096	0.026	0.976	0.376	−0.302		1,000
	(0.374)	(0.298)	(0.777)	(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.001)
(8) DIR*TATO	−0.082	−0.245	0.282	0.946	0.543	−0.242		0.924	1,000
	(0.372)	(0.007)	(0.002)	(0.000)	(0.000)	(0.008)		(0.000)
(1) CSR	1,000
(2) AUDIT	0.002	1,000
(3) DIR	0.064	0.031	1,000
(4) TATO	−0.091	−0.279*	0.020	1,000
(5) ROE	−0.256*	−0.139	0.273*	0.402*	1,000
(6) SIZE	0.257*	0.477*	0.483*	−0.390*	−0.189	1,000
(7) AUDIT*TATO	−0.082	−0.096	0.026	0.976*	0.376*	−0.302*		1,000
(8) D IR*TATO	−0.082	−0.245*	0.282*	0.946*	0.543*	−0.242*		0.924*	1,000

*** p < 0.01, **p < 0.05, *p < 0.1

Table 4. Goodness of fit model

VARIABLES	(Model 1)	(Model 2)	(Model 3)	(Model 4)
	OLS	Fixed Effects	Random Effects	Robust
AUDIT	−0.0354**	−0.0354**	−0.0354**	−0.0354**
	(0.0530)	(0.0542)	(0.0530)	(0.0453)
DIR	−0.00821	−0.00833	−0.00821	−0.00821
	(0.00980)	(0.0100)	(0.00980)	(0.00675)
TATO	−0.136	−0.136	−0.136	−0.136
	(0.153)	(0.158)	(0.153)	(0.162)
ROE	−0.128**	−0.129**	−0.128**	−0.128***
	(0.0530)	(0.0542)	(0.0530)	(0.0453)
SIZE	0.0354**	0.0354**	0.0354**	0.0354**
	(0.0144)	(0.0149)	(0.0144)	(0.0146)
AUDIT*TATO	−0.0354**	−0.0354**	−0.0354**	−0.0354**
	(0.0530)	(0.0542)	(0.0530)	(0.0453)
DIR*TATO	0.0101	0.0102	0.0101	0.0101
	(0.0112)	(0.0115)	(0.0112)	(0.0105)
Constant	−0.190	−0.190	−0.190	−0.190
	(0.243)	(0.252)	(0.243)	(0.259)
Observations	120	120	120	120
R-squared	0.148	0.146		0.148
Number of Year		5	5

Standard errors in parentheses *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.1

Data availability statement

The study did not involve any data sets and the articles collected were sourced from https://www.scopus.com/ home.uri, accessed on 2022 and https://scholar.google.com/, accessed on 2022.