The interaction between leverage and cash-balance dynamics : An empirical study of time-series variation in leverage and cash-balance ratios in publicly listed firms in the Nordics

This paper investigates whether time-series variation in leverage can be linked to hypothetical cash-balance squeezes for Nordic firms. The methodology in this paper is based on the article by DeAngelo, H., Concalves, A. S., & Stulz, A. S. (2022). We uncover that high time-series variation in leverage and cash-balance ratios is the norm for firms facing hypothetical cash squeezes in the period January 2000 to December 2021. Capital expenditures are found to be the main users of funds and the primary driver of time-series variation in leverage ratios. Overall, we document an empirical link between leverage and cash-balance dynamics. Over extended time periods, cash ratios display wide variations that closely resemble and complement the dynamics of capital structure. The interactions between leverage and cash dynamics align with the predictions of the internal-versus-external funding regime outlined in Myers & Majluf (1984). When cash ratios remain stable, leverage tends to be highly volatile, and vice versa. Net-debt ratios are almost always volatile. As internal funds (cash balances) become scarce, most firms significantly increase their leverage. The latter is especially true for firms delisted due to bankruptcy or liquidation. In sum, we report that there exists an interaction between leverage and cash balances. Consequently, researchers and companies should start to consider the two financial items as co-dependent rather than univariate variables. The research in this paper is placed in the intersection between the research fields of capital structures and cash balances, providing valuable insights to the small research field of leverage and cash dynamics.nhhma

How radiographers visually perceive X-ray images with the task of accepting or rejecting them – a pilot study

Introduction: Radiographer´s usual role in the medical imaging chain is to acquire relevant and qualitatively good images that help the radiologist or physician to diagnose most accurately. After the image acquisition, the radiographer does a quality evaluation based on established imaging criteria to decide if the image is satisfactory, or otherwise reject it and subsequently take a new one. Contrary to expectations that the number of image rejects should decrease substantially with the introduction of digital imaging, a number of studies have shown that it has not, although the reasons for rejects has changed from exposure errors to positioning and centring errors. Very little research has been on examining how radiographers visually perceive and evaluate the X-ray images in this acceptance/rejection process. Purpose: Investigate how radiographers and radiography students visually perceives X-ray images in the process of accepting or rejecting them on basis of radiographic imaging criteria, and see if there are differences in strategies across experience levels. Materials and methods: Three radiography students and five radiographers with varying years of experience were given the task of accepting or rejecting shoulder and knee projection images based on positioning criteria. Using eye tracking, we measured the participants’ number and duration of gaze fixations within 1) the field of view defined by the monitor display, 2) the part of the monitor displaying the X-ray image only, and 3) the region within the X-ray images considered to be most relevant given the imaging criteria task. The quantitative eye-tracking measurements were followed-up by four qualitative questions. Results: Some differences in fixation patterns between the groups were found; the medium experienced radiographers spent statistically significant lesser number of fixations and lesser average single fixation durations than both the radiography students and the most experienced radiographers did, whereas the two latter groups scored almost equally. Conclusion: The study revealed that work experience might have some influence on how radiographers and radiography students assess X-ray images, but in subtler ways than expected. The study also revealed, however, quite large individual differences across experience

How does experience affect radiographers and radiography students eye movement while studying radiographs based on image criterias?

NORSK: Hensikt: Hensikten med denne studien var å undersøke om erfaring hadde noe å si for hvordan radiografer og radiografstudenter så på røntgenbilder ut ifra bilderkriterier. Det som ble vektlagt var hvordan de så på bildene, hvor lang tid de brukte og hva de så mest på. Det fantes et fåtall studier som omhandlet analyse av øyebevegelsen til radiografer, når de ser på røntgenbilder. Metode: Dette var en empirisk studie hvor det ble gjort et utvalg av ni deltakere; tre radiografstudenter, tre middels erfarne radiografer og tre erfarne radiografer. Studien var todelt da den bestod av både forsøk og litteratursøk. I forsøket ble det benyttet eye tracking utstyr og intervjuer. Resultat: Resultatene av studien ble presentert i forskjellige kategorier via tabeller, figurer og tekst. Alle resultatene som ble presentert var samlet for hver erfaringsgruppe, med ett unntak der forskjellen mellom deltakerne innad i gruppene ble omtalt. Konklusjon: Gjennom denne studien kom det frem at erfaring kanskje ikke har så mye å si når det kommer til hvordan radiografer og radiografstudenter ser på røntgenbilder, og at det heller er mer individuelt. På grunn av få deltakere kan vi ikke konkludere med at det er slik det er.ENGLISH: Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether experience had something to do with how radiographers and radiography students studied radiographs based on image criterias. There was focus on how they studied the image, what amount of time they spent and where they focused the most. There were a few studies concerned with the analysis of eye movement for radiographers studying radiographs. Method: This was an empirical study consisting of a selection of nine participants; three radiography students, three medium experienced radiographers and three experienced radiographers. The study was two folded consisting of both an experiment and literature. The experiment consisted of eye tracking and interviews. Results: The results of the study were presented in different categories through tables, figures and text. All results presented were collected for each experience group, with one exception where the difference between participants within the groups were discussed. Conclusion: This study revealed that experience might not have much influence on how radiographers and radiography students study radiographs, it rather seems like its more individually. Due to few participants, we can not conclude that this is the way it is

Hvordan påvirker erfaring radiografer og radiografstudenters øyebevegelse ved vurdering av røntgenbilder med utgangspunkt i bildekriterier?

NORSK: Hensikt: Hensikten med denne studien var å undersøke om erfaring hadde noe å si for hvordan radiografer og radiografstudenter så på røntgenbilder ut ifra bilderkriterier. Det som ble vektlagt var hvordan de så på bildene, hvor lang tid de brukte og hva de så mest på. Det fantes et fåtall studier som omhandlet analyse av øyebevegelsen til radiografer, når de ser på røntgenbilder. Metode: Dette var en empirisk studie hvor det ble gjort et utvalg av ni deltakere; tre radiografstudenter, tre middels erfarne radiografer og tre erfarne radiografer. Studien var todelt da den bestod av både forsøk og litteratursøk. I forsøket ble det benyttet eye tracking utstyr og intervjuer. Resultat: Resultatene av studien ble presentert i forskjellige kategorier via tabeller, figurer og tekst. Alle resultatene som ble presentert var samlet for hver erfaringsgruppe, med ett unntak der forskjellen mellom deltakerne innad i gruppene ble omtalt. Konklusjon: Gjennom denne studien kom det frem at erfaring kanskje ikke har så mye å si når det kommer til hvordan radiografer og radiografstudenter ser på røntgenbilder, og at det heller er mer individuelt. På grunn av få deltakere kan vi ikke konkludere med at det er slik det er

How radiographers visually perceive X-ray images with the task of accepting or rejecting them – a pilot study

Introduction: Radiographer´s usual role in the medical imaging chain is to acquire relevant and qualitatively good images that help the radiologist or physician to diagnose most accurately. After the image acquisition, the radiographer does a quality evaluation based on established imaging criteria to decide if the image is satisfactory, or otherwise reject it and subsequently take a new one. Contrary to expectations that the number of image rejects should decrease substantially with the introduction of digital imaging, a number of studies have shown that it has not, although the reasons for rejects has changed from exposure errors to positioning and centring errors. Very little research has been on examining how radiographers visually perceive and evaluate the X-ray images in this acceptance/rejection process.Purpose: Investigate how radiographers and radiography students visually perceives X-ray images in the process of accepting or rejecting them on basis of radiographic imaging criteria, and see if there are differences in strategies across experience levels.Materials and methods: Three radiography students and five radiographers with varying years of experience were given the task of accepting or rejecting shoulder and knee projection images based on positioning criteria. Using eye tracking, we measured the participants’ number and duration of gaze fixations within 1) the field of view defined by the monitor display, 2) the part of the monitor displaying the X-ray image only, and 3) the region within the X-ray images considered to be most relevant given the imaging criteria task. The quantitative eye-tracking measurements were followed-up by four qualitative questions.Results: Some differences in fixation patterns between the groups were found; the medium experienced radiographers spent statistically significant lesser number of fixations and lesser average single fixation durations than both the radiography students and the most experienced radiographers did, whereas the two latter groups scored almost equally. Conclusion: The study revealed that work experience might have some influence on how radiographers and radiography students assess X-ray images, but in subtler ways than expected. The study also revealed, however, quite large individual differences across experience