SYNOPSIS: In response to concerns over the viability of the academic discipline of accounting, we investigate trends in accounting research by examining papers published in six top accounting journals from 1960 to 2007. We use citations made by accounting papers as a proxy for their antecedent ideas and examine trends in citations, topics, and methodologies, in aggregate and by journal. Our results suggest that the growing body of accounting research draws increasingly from both finance and economics. Financial accounting topics and archival methodologies are becoming more dominant over time relative to other topics and methodologies, although these trends vary by journal. Though most concerns we discuss are recent, we find that the situation today is the result of trends set in motion decades ago with an explicit decision by influential researchers to move the discipline from a normative perspective to a positive perspective. Given its current state, accounting research may be broadly characterized as research into the effect of economic events on the process of summarizing, analyzing, verifying, and reporting standardized financial information, and on the effects of reported information on economic events.

In response to concerns over the viability of the academic discipline of accounting we investigate trends in accounting research by examining papers published in six top accounting journals from 1960 to 2007. We use citations made by accounting papers as a proxy for their antecedent ideas and examine trends in citations, topics, and methodologies, in aggregate and by journal. Our results suggest that the growing body of accounting research draws increasingly from both finance and economics. Financial accounting topics and archival methodologies are becoming more dominant over time relative to other topics and methodologies, although these trends vary by journal. Although most concerns we discuss are recent, we find that the situation today is the result of trends set in motion decades ago with an explicit decision by influential researchers to move the discipline from a normative perspective to a positive perspective. Given its current state accounting research may be broadly characterized as research into the effect of economic events on the process of summarizing, analyzing, verifying, and reporting standardized financial information, and on the effects of reported information on economic events.

Quantitative methods are in frequent use in modern accounting research. The evidence may be found e.g. in the journals like “Journal of Accounting Research”, “European Accounting Review”, “Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting” or in the Accounting Research Network in SSRN base. Paper presents a brief survey of research areas and statistical-econometric approaches in accounting research. Particular reference goes to research on corporate disclosure. Methodological component of the paper includes remarks on the use of binary response models with choice-based and matched samples as well as comments on the sample selection approaches.

Abstract: Autoethnography is prominent in qualitative social science research but is relatively less common in accounting research, though its influence is beginning to grow as researchers recognize this rich and innovative methodological approach. Autoethnography enables the researcher themselves to form a subject of lived inquiry within the social context of accounting and its environs. For qualitative accounting researchers this offers new forms of knowing and understanding experience, emotion and identity in the social context of the accounting profession or accounting academia, or in relation to the social construction of accounting itself. This chapter outlines what autoethnography is as both a research process and a product of research; explores the ontological, epistemological and methodological issues arising from such an approach; discusses the various forms that autoethnography takes; outlines ways of writing autoethnography; illustrates how it has been used in contemporary accounting research; discusses some of the dilemmas and tensions involved; and evaluates its future possibilities in accounting research.

Recent accounting research has begun to utilise resources from the art of interpretation as developed in the recent social science literature. This area of research is gaining prominence, taking th...

This paper surveys accounting research as seen through the eyes of international accounting researchers. Several studies have been published by researchers across the globe in both American and non-American accounting research journals critical of not only the dominant accounting research construct, but also of university affiliation of editors and peer-reviewers, editorial control of “elite” accounting journals, and the peer-review process. There is remarkable similarity and substantial agreement in the conclusions reached. The hegemony of the accounting research construct has stifled innovative accounting research and research methods, suppressed the diversity of accounting research, and dampened the importance and impact of authentic international accounting research.

(1978). Does Accounting Research Matter? Accounting and Business Research: Vol. 9, No. 33, pp. 25-34.

The objective of this paper is to explore all related literature with multiparadigm accounting research approaches. The literature search strategy begins by looking at literature from sources in the forms of books or sources originating from several databases or search engines including open knowledge maps, google scholar, and z-library. The keywords used for the search are “accounting: science with various paradigms, multiparadigm accounting research, accounting paradigm and paradigm accounting”. From the results of searching and reviewing the literature, including books, journal articles and other electronic sources, various kinds of multiparadigm accounting research were obtained. By knowing the benefits of each of the paradigm viewpoints that have been described, it is good if we take a mixed paradigm approach in accounting research so that research results are of higher quality because they are not only based on one paradigm. Even though in one research using one accounting paradigm, those of us who strongly believe in a certain paradigm still have an open mind towards other paradigms thus enriching our views so that in studying accounting all paradigms are believed to complement one another. This research will greatly contribute to academics in viewing accounting from various perspectives. This literature review classifies multiparadigm accounting research based on more specific groups.

I accepted the invitation to present my thoughts to the American Accounting Association Executive Committee on whether accounting research has become stagnant for several reasons. First, I believe the question is important because the answer has widespread implications, one of which is the extent to which accounting research will remain an important part of the accounting academic profession in the years to come. In order to maintain the current stature of accounting research or to increase its importance, we need to ensure that we produce research that someone cares about. Second, there appears to be a growing sentiment among some accounting researchers that much of the research currently published in the top accounting journals is too similar, with too much emphasis on technique rather than on whether the research addresses an interesting or important question. My final reason was more self-serving. I thought this would provide a good opportunity to reflect on an important issue, and that committing to share my thoughts in a public forum would force me to give the issue the serious consideration it warrants. My comments below describe some conclusions I reached based on what others have written about this issue, discussions with colleagues, and my own reflections.

For research to have an impact, it has to exist in the first place. Moves in the UK to link University funding to research activity have reinforced the importance of research to academia - however, this may also have had adverse consequences. It is now very difficult for qualified accountants to obtain teaching and research positions at UK universities because of the lack of a research background. Institutional pressures on those conducting research may also have resulted in dysfunctional behaviour regarding the nature of the work conducted and the output. In the 1960s there was an attempt to make accounting research more scientific, however, this seems to resulted in the emphasis on research methodology rather than the importance of making a contribution to knowledge. The lack of emphasis on the reliability (the reproducibility of the results) and validity (whether you are testing what you think you are testing) of statistical findings merely appears to have resulted in the application of pseudoscience to accounting research. All these factors appear to have combined to bring into question the relevance of the accounting research produced.