Discussion of An Assessment of Laboratory Experiments in Accounting

Abstract

Swieringa and Weick raise several important issues.1 Few of these issues are new, and they are not restricted to laboratory experiments in accounting. Instead, they apply to laboratory experiments in general. The issues addressed are, however, of continuing interest to experimental researchers in accounting, and Swieringa and Weick's assessment should lead to a better understanding of the nature of experimentation in this field. One problem I have with the paper is that it is difficult to disagree with much of the general commentary they provide. It is not easy to disagree with a paper that argues both for fostering realism and for ignoring realism, that argues both for building more structure and more freedom into experiments, and that suggests being more systematic in documenting what actually occurs in an experiment to reduce the possibility of alternative interpretations while also suggesting that alternative interpretations can be instructive. However, given the importance of the issues raised by Swieringa and Weick, I am disappointed that they provide few specific insights into what, if anything, should have been done differently in laboratory experiments in accounting during the period of their review, and few concrete