Accounting Research: A Critical View Of The Present Situation And Prospects | Revista de Contabilidad-Spanish Accounting Review

Información del artículo

Abstract

In this study we critically review the internal procedures of the accounting community for generating and disseminating knowledge. We contend that academic journals on accounting research are scarce, publish few articles and apply high rejection rates, and the review process is lengthy and expensive. Additionally, an academic elite has unparalleled predominance in comparison to other business disciplines, reflected in an unusual share of published articles with authors affiliated to a small number of academic institutions, and the predominance of certain topics and methodologies. The discipline does not allow the collaborative, iterative and flexible features of innovative knowledge communities. The discipline's internal procedures favour restriction, control, slowness, and expiration, rather than participation, speed and renewal. They are ill suited for advancing knowledge and bode badly for successful research. As a result, accounting academics present low research performance and the discipline is facing steady decline. More importantly, the discipline is handicapped in producing innovative knowledge able to contribute to critical research and long term social well-being.

We also focus on the Spanish institutional situation, arguing that Spanish requirements for reaching tenured positions are difficult for accountants to meet.

We highlight the need to raise awareness of the problem and change the procedures.

Key words:

accounting research

critical research

accounting journals

publishing in accounting

accounting elite

research performance

journal rejection

Resumen

En este estudio hacemos una revisión crítica de los procedimientos vigentes en la comunidad académica contable para la generación de conocimiento y su publicación. Exponemos que hay pocas revistas académicas para publicar la investigación contable, que éstas publican pocos artículos, aplican elevadas tasas de rechazo y el proceso de revisión es lento y costoso. Además, hay un predominio de una elite académica sin precedentes en otras disciplinas de empresa, lo cual se refleja en un mayor porcentaje de artículos pertenecientes a autores afiliados a un pequeño número de instituciones académicas, y el predominio de ciertos temas y metodologías. La disciplina no presenta los rasgos de colaboración, interactividad y flexibilidad propios de las comunidades dinámicas e innovadoras en la producción de conocimiento. El funcionamiento de la disciplina está más orientado al control que al avance del conocimiento. Los procedimientos seguidos en la disciplina no son los más apropiados para favorecer el éxito en la investigación. En consecuencia, los académicos contables presentan poca producción investigadora y tienen dificultades para desarrollar con éxito una carrera investigadora. Lo que es aún más importante, la disciplina ofrece pocas posibilidades de generar investigación crítica en cuestiones sociales y medioambientales.

Este trabajo analiza también la situación institucional en España, aduciendo que los requisitos exigidos para alcanzar posiciones de estabilidad académica son difíciles de conseguir para los académicos que se dedican a la contabilidad.

Ponemos de relieve la necesidad de tomar conciencia del problema, como primer paso para cambiar el funcionamiento de la disciplina.

Palabras clave:

investigación contable

investigación crítica

revistas académicas de contabilidad

publicar en contabilidad

élite contable

producción investigadora

tasas de rechazo de las revistas

El Texto completo está disponible en PDF

References

[Abdel-Khalik and Ajinkya, 1979]

A.R. Abdel-Khalik, B.B. Ajinkya.

Empirical research in accounting: a methodological viewpoint.

American Accounting Association, (1979),

[ACAPDT, (2007)]

ACAPDT.(2007) Accounting faculty in the U.S. Colleges and Universitues: status and trends, 1993-2004 (available at: http://www.treasury.gov/offices/domesticfinance/acap/submissions/12032007/Leslie120307.pdf)

[Adair, 1982]

R.K. Adair.

A physics editor comments on Peters and Ceci's peer-review study.

Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5 (1982), pp. 196

[Adams and Whelan, 2009]

C.A. Adams, G. Whelan.

Conceptualising fuure changes in corporate sustainability reporting.

Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 22 (2009), pp. 118-143

[Anderson et al., 1997]

J.R. Anderson, L.M. Reder, H.A. Simon.

Situative versus cognitive perspectives: form versus substance.

Educational Researcher, 26 (1997), pp. 18-21

[AN Programa et al., 2008]

ANECA Programa Academia. (2008). Principios y orientaciones para la aplicación de los criterios de evaluación. V.1.0 9/01/2008.

[Arnold, 2009]

P.J. Arnold.

Global financial crisis: the challenge to accounting research.

Accounting. Organizations and Society, 34 (2009), pp. 803-809

[Baker and Bettner, 1997]

C.R. Baker, M.S. Bettner.

Interpretative and critical research in accounting: a commentary on its absence from mainstream accounting research.

Critical perspectives on Accounting, 8 (1997), pp. 293-310

[Baldwin et al., 2010]

A.A. Baldwin, C.E. Brown, B.S. Trinkle.

Accounting doctoral programs: a multidimensional description.

Advances in Accounting Education, 11 (2010), pp. 101-128

[Ballas and Theodorakis, 2003]

A. Ballas, V. Theodorakis.

Exploring diversity in accounting through faculty journal perceptions.

Contemporary Accounting Research, 20 (2003), pp. 619-644

[Beard et al., 1985]

L.H. Beard, F.A. Jacobs, A.L. Hartgraves.

Publications: a valid measure of faculty contribution?.

Journal of Acounting education, 3 (1985), pp. 155-161

[Beattie, 2004]

V. Beattie.

Tradiciones de investigación en contabilidad financiera.

Metodología de la investigación en finanzas y contabilidad, pp. 129-154

[Bereiter, 2002]

C. Bereiter.

Education and mind in the knowledge age.

Lawrence Erlbaum, (2002),

[Bornmann and Daniel, 2009]

L. Bornmann, H.-D. Daniel.

Reviewer and editor biases in journal peer review: an investigation of manuscript refereeing at Angewandte Chemie International Edition.

Research Evaluation, 18 (2009), pp. 262-272

[Brinn et al., 2001]

T. Brinn, M. Jones, M. Pendlebury.

Why do UK accounting and finance academics not publish in top US journals?.

British Accounting Review, 33 (2001), pp. 223-232

[Broad and Wade, 1985]

W. Broad, N. Wade.

Betrayers of the truth.

Oxford University Press, (1985),

[Brown et al., 2007]

R. Brown, M. Jones, T. Steele.

Still flickering at the margins of existence? Publishing patterns and themes in accounting and finance research over the last two decades.

British Accounting Review, 39 (2007), pp. 125-151

[Bucheit et al., 2002]

S. Bucheit, D. Collins, A. Reitenga.

A cross-discipline comparison of top-tier academic publication rates: 1997-1999.

Journal of Accounting Education, 20 (2002), pp. 123-130

[Campanario, 1996]

J.M. Campanario.

Have referees rejected some of the most-cited articles of all times?.

Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47 (1996), pp. 302-310

[Chan et al., 2006]

K.C. Chan, C.R. Chen, L.T.W. Cheng.

A ranking of accounting research output in the European region.

Accounting and Business Research, 36 (2006), pp. 3-17

[Cicchetti, 1991]

D.V. Cicchetti.

The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation.

Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14 (1991), pp. 119-186

[Cole et al., 1981]

S. Cole, J.R. Cole, G.A. Simon.

Chance and consensus in peer review.

Science, 214 (1981), pp. 881-886

Medline

[Deckel et al., 2005]

E. Deckel, J. Horowitz, D. Levine, C. Meghir, A. Postlewaite.

The econometric society annual reports. Report of the editors 2003-2004.

Econometrica, 1 (2005), pp. 325-328

[Dumontier and Raffournier, 2002]

P. Dumontier, B. Raffournier.

Accounting and capital markets: a survey or the European evidence.

European Acounting Review, 11 (2002), pp. 119-151

[Fogarty and Markarian, 2007]

T.J. Fogarty, G. Markarian.

An empirical assessment of the rise and fall of accounting as an academic discipline.

Issues in Accounting Education, 22 (2007), pp. 137-161

[Fogarty and Yu, 2010]

T.J. Fogarty, W. Yu.

The sustainability of success: distinguishing the lucky form the good in the stacked deck of academic accounting.

The Accounting Educator's Journal, XX (2010), pp. 63-89

[Gangs and Shepherd, 1994]

J.S. Gangs, G.B. Shepherd.

How are the mighty fallen: rejected classic articles by leading economists.

Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8 (1994), pp. 165-169

[Gray, 2010]

R. Gray.

A re-evaluation of social, environmental and sustainability accounting An exploratory analysis of an emerging trans-disciplinary field.

Sustainability Accounting, 1 (2010), pp. 11-31

[Hargens, 1988]

L.L. Hargens.

Scholarly consensus and journal rejection rates.

American Sociological Review, 53 (1988), pp. 139-151

[Hess, 1997]

D.J. Hess.

Science Studies. An advanced introduction.

New York University Press, (1997),

[Hopwood, 2002]

A.G. Hopwood.

If only there were simple solutions, but there aren’t: some reflections on Zimmerman's critique of empirical management accounting research.

European Accounting Review, 11 (2002), pp. 777-785

[Hubbard and And Vetter, 1996]

R. Hubbard, D.E. Vetter.

An empirical comparison of published replication in accounting, economics, finance, management and marketing.

Journal of Business Research, 35 (1996), pp. 153-164

[Inglis and Mejia-Ramos, 2009]

M. Inglis, J.P. Mejia-Ramos.

The effect of authority on the persuasiveness of mathematical arguments.

Cognition and Instruction, 27 (2009), pp. 25-50

[Johnson et al., 2002]

P.M. Johnson, P.M. Reckers, L. Solomon.

Evolving research benchmarks.

Advances in Accounting, 19 (2002), pp. 235-253

[Jones and Roberts, 2005]

M.J. Jones, R. Roberts.

International publishing patterns: an investigation of leading UK and US accounting and finance journals.

Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 32 (2005), pp. 1107-1140

[Lee, 1995]

T. Lee.

Shaping the US academic accounting research profession: the American Accounting Association and the social construction of a professional elite.

Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 6 (1995), pp. 241-261

[Merchant et al., 2003]

K.A. Merchant, W.A. Van der Stede, L. Zheng.

Disciplinary constraints on the advancement of knowledge: the case of organizational incentive systems.

Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28 (2003), pp. 251-286

[Moizer, 2009]

P. Moizer.

Publishing in accounting journals: a fair game?.

Accounting Organizations and Society, 34 (2009), pp. 285-304

[Paavola et al., 2004]

S. Paavola, L. Lipponen, K. Hakkarainen.

Models of innovative knpwledge communities and three metaphors of learning.

Review of Educational Research, 74 (2004), pp. 557-576

[Parker and And Guthrie, 2005]

L. Parker, J. Guthrie.

Managing accounting research in a orporatized university world.

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 18 (2005), pp. 5-13

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12226 | Medline

[Parker et al., 1998]

L. Parker, J. Guthrie, R. Gray.

Accounting and management research: passwords from the gatekeepers.

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 11 (1998), pp. 371-402

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12226 | Medline

[Peters and Ceci, 1982]

D.P. Peters, S. Ceci.

Peer review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again.

Behavioural and brain Sciences, 5 (1982), pp. 187-255

[Petruska et al., 2007]

Petruska, K.A., Alam, P and Pearson, M. A. (2007) The number of graduates from US accounting doctoral programs: the association with faculty attributes and institutional reputation (available at SSRN: http://ssrn. com/abstract=1078197)

[Plumlee et al., 2006]

R.D. Plumlee, S.J. Kachelmeier, S.A. Madeo, J.H. Pratt, G. Krull.

Assessing the shortage of accounting faculty.

Issues on Accounting Education, 21 (2006), pp. 113-125

[Raelin, 2008]

J.A. Raelin.

Refereeing the game of peer review.

Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7 (2008), pp. 124-129

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2015.02.020 | Medline

[Raffournier and And Schatt, 2010]

B. Raffournier, A. Schatt.

Is European accounting fairly reflected in academic journals?.