A Content Based Assessment of the Relative Quality of Leading Accounting Journals

Date
2019-08-25
Authors
Cready, William
Liu, Bo
Wang, Di
Contributor
Advisor
Department
Instructor
Depositor
Speaker
Researcher
Consultant
Interviewer
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Volume
Number/Issue
Starting Page
Ending Page
Alternative Title
Abstract
This analysis advances faithful representation of statistical evidence as a substantive basis for assessing accounting journal research quality. The analysis builds upon recent work by Cready et al. (2019) indicating that accounting research articles commonly misrepresent null outcomes in their abstracts. Our analysis exploits this reporting deficiency to objectively assess journal reporting quality. The analysis determines misrepresentation rates for five leading general interest academic accounting journals based on direct review of article abstract contents. While all five of these journals commonly publish articles containing such misrepresentations, the relative frequencies with which they do so differ considerably. Moreover, the resulting rankings vary from those commonly reported in existent accounting journal quality and impact assessments. The analysis also finds that financial and archival studies are less prone to statistical evidence misrepresentation while audit and experimental studies are more prone to engaging in such misrepresentation.
Description
Keywords
Representational Faithfulness, Accounting Quality, Journal Impact Assessment
Citation
Extent
Format
Geographic Location
Time Period
Related To
Rights
Rights Holder
Email libraryada-l@lists.hawaii.edu if you need this content in ADA-compliant format.