RESEARCH PAPER
Application of Mediating Effect Test in Social Science Research: an Empirical Analysis of Geographic and Institutional Factors
Qi Yue 1
,  
Xing Hua 2  
,  
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
South China Normal University, CHINA
2
Guangdong Youth Vocational College, CHINA
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Xing Hua   

Department of Finance and Economics, Guangdong Youth Vocational College, China. Address to No.19, Huajing Rd., Tianhe Dist., Guangzhou City 510630, China. Tel: +86-13826007823
Online publish date: 2017-09-15
Publish date: 2017-09-15
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2017;13(9):6285–6293
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Test for mediating effect is an important method in social science research. In this paper, we applied mediating effect test in corporate acquisition research. Acquisition is one of the most important ways to expand a company, especially in emerging markets. From the perspective of institutional view, we made an empirical research on the relationship between geographic and institutional factors and the acquisition performance based on a sample of acquisitions in China. We found that acquisition legitimacy based on different region, including external and internal legitimacy, has positive effect on acquisition performance. We conclude that cross-region acquisition has negative influence on external legitimacy of acquisition, while having no significant influence on internal legitimacy of acquisition.
 
REFERENCES (21)
1.
Bertrand, O., Betschinger, M-A., & Settles, A. (2016). The relevance of political affinity for the initial acquisition premium in cross-border acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal, 37(4), 2071-2091.
 
2.
Bruton, G., Oviatt, M., & White, A. (1994). Performance of acquisitions of distressed firms. Academy of Management Journal, 37(4), 972-989.
 
3.
Capron, L., & Guillen, M. (2009). National corporate governance institutions and post-acquisition target reorganization. Strategic Management Journal, 30(8), 803-833.
 
4.
Chakrabarti, A., & Mitchell, W. (2016). The role of geographic distance in completing related acquisitions: Evidence from U.S. chemical manufacturers. Strategic Management Journal, 37(2), 673-694.
 
5.
Chan, C.-M., & Makino, S. (2007). Legitimacy and multi-level institutional environments: implications for foreign subsidiary ownership structure. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(2), 621-638.
 
6.
Cording, M., Christmann, P., & King, D. (2008). Reducing causal ambiguity in acquisition integration: intermediate goals as mediators of integration decisions and acquisition performance. Academy of Management Journal, 51(4), 744-767.
 
7.
Cui, L., & Jiang, F. (2012). State ownership effect on firms’ FDI ownership decisions under institutional pressure: A study of Chinese outward-investing firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(1), 264–284.
 
8.
Dacin, M., Oliver, C., & Roy, J. (2007). The legitimacy of strategic alliances: an institutional perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 28(1), 169-187.
 
9.
Datta, D., & Puia, G. (1995). Cross-border acquisitions: an examination of the influence of relatedness and cultural fit on shareholder value creation in U.S. acquiring firms. Management International Review, 35(2), 337-359.
 
10.
DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(1), 147-160.
 
11.
He, Y., & Li, X-C. (2000). A preliminary study on the strategy of trans-regional expansion of enterprises. Management World, 16(6), 106-114. (in Chinese).
 
12.
Hoskisson, R., Eden, L., Lau, C.-M., & Wright, M. (2000). Strategy in emerging economies. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 249-267.
 
13.
Hunt, J. (1990). Changing pattern of acquisition behavior in takeovers and consequences for acquisition processes. Strategic Management Journal, 11(1), 69-77.
 
14.
Inkpen, A., Sundaram, A., & Rockwood, K. (2000). Cross-border acquisitions of U.S. technology assets. California Management Review, 42 (Spring), 50-70.
 
15.
Kim, J., & Finkelstein, S. (2009). The effects of strategic and market complementarity on acquisition performance: evidence from the U.S. commercial banking industry. Strategic Management Journal, 30(2), 617-646.
 
16.
Li, S.-M., & Zhou, X.-C. (2007). An empirical research of corporate characteristics, industry characteristics and acquisition strategy types. Management World, 23(3), 130-137. (in Chinese).
 
17.
Shimizu, K., Hitt, M., Vaidyanath, D., & Pisano, V. (2004). Theoretical foundations of cross-border mergers and acquisitions: A review of current research and recommendations for the future. Journal of International Management, 10(2), 307-353.
 
18.
Suchman, M. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571-610.
 
19.
Trichterborn, A., zu Knyphausen-Aufseß, D., & Schweizer, L. (2016). How to improve acquisition performance the role of a dedicated M&A function, M&A learning process, and M&A capability. Strategic Management Journal, 37(2), 763–773.
 
20.
Yue, Q. (2017). Contract or Relationship in Cross-region Alliance: Alliance Control, Institutional Distance and Alliance Performance of the Chinese Cross-region Alliances. Journal of Business Economics, 27(5), 42-51. (in Chinese).
 
21.
Yue, Q., Li, J.-Y., & Jiang, L. (2016). Relational governance, alliance type and alliance performance in Chinese strategic alliances. Soft Science, 30(8), 85-88. (in Chinese).
 
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215