The Journal of Management Accounting Research: A Content and Citation Analysis of the First 25 Years

2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 93-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daryl M. Guffey ◽  
Nancy L. Harp

ABSTRACT This article provides a descriptive content analysis and citation analysis for the Journal of Management Accounting Research (JMAR) between 1989 and 2013. Adopting the Shields (1997) taxonomy of managerial accounting research, we categorize articles published in JMAR by research method, topic, and underlying discipline (theory) and present information on changes in content over time to identify potential trends. We also collect citations to articles in JMAR and use citation metrics to identify which research methods, topics, underlying disciplines, and specific articles have contributed the most toward establishing JMAR as a premier accounting journal. Finally, we interpret content trends in conjunction with citation results to provide insights for the future of JMAR. Most notably, we report that research methods such as Survey, Literature Review, and Field Study are decreasing in prevalence in JMAR over time, yet these are the research methods that have the greatest impact based on citations collected.

2009 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 249-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim M. Lindquist ◽  
Gerald Smith

ABSTRACT: This article provides a content and citation analysis of 186 articles published in the Journal of Management Accounting Research (JMAR) between 1989 and 2008. We first examine JMAR's national and international presence. Then an analysis of JMAR is structured by a taxonomy used by Hesford et al. (2007) to classify the articles into content, source disciplines, research methods, and contributors. Articles and citations in JMAR are analyzed and the most-cited authors, articles, journals, and books are presented. The extent to which JMAR authors are cited in leading non-management accounting journals is also presented. Finally, authorships and editorial contributions by international faculty are compiled and discussed.


2004 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 163-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yaw M. Mensah ◽  
Nen-Chen Richard Hwang ◽  
Donghui Wu

This paper examines two issues. The first issue is the degree of relative isolation of managerial accounting research (MAR) from related disciplines. Using citations collected from the Web of Science, the study shows that MAR published during 1986–2000 in the four leading accounting journals is cited in journals in fields as diverse as economics, operations research, psychology, sociology, organizational behavior, and strategic management. Our findings support Kinney's (2001) observation that accounting researchers have a competitive advantage in areas relating to alternative business measurement structures. The second issue the paper addresses is whether economics-based MAR papers make a greater contribution than papers based on other disciplines, as perceived from their respective citation rates. Our citation analysis finds no evidence that economicsbased papers are cited by non-accounting researchers at a higher rate than MAR based on other disciplines. Extending the comparison to accounting journals covered in the Web of Science did not change this conclusion. We interpret this as a refutation of the contention by Zimmerman (2001) that economics-based MAR papers are more likely to make significant contributions to knowledge. We also report some preliminary evidence that the relevance of MAR to researchers publishing in non-accounting journals is waning. Although this finding is tentative, it may be an early warning signal that should be monitored in future research.


Author(s):  
H. Buluthan Cetintas

Corporate sustainability (CS) has many advantages such as enhancing brand value, providing reputation, and also focuses on gaining the trust of stakeholders. This is a qualitative exploratory study; its goal is to understand how CS research has changed over time. The most cited articles were selected from the journals indexed in SSCI (2000-2019). One hundred and two articles were selected and analyzed by content analysis method. Nature of typical samples, major themes, and research methods used were sought to investigate in CS research. Results showed that there was some scarcity in studies choosing a particular country as a sample. There were no articles in areas important for sustainability research. Besides, index types are barely used in articles. Some subject areas have attracted attention for years and haven't lost their popularity, but some remained in the background. The most used method was content analysis.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (13) ◽  
pp. 57-67
Author(s):  
Guna Malinovska ◽  
Anda Zvaigzne

The research aims to examine the theoretical aspects of administrative and territorial reform as well as to identify the attitudes of Latgale region residents to implementing the new administrative and territorial reform. The following research methods were employed: qualitative content analysis; analysis of legislative enactments and legal documents; a sociological research method – a survey was conducted to identify the opinions and assessments of Latgale residents about the new administrative and territorial reform; descriptive statistics and the graphical method. The research examined theoretical aspects regarding the division of territory into administrative units as well as the concept and definitions of a municipality as an administrative unit. The research analysed the results of the survey of Latgale region residents and identified the respondents’ assessments of implementing the new administrative and territorial reform.


2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Hayman

A Review of: Turcios, M. E., Agarwal, N. K., & Watkins, L. (2014). How much of library and information science literature qualifies as research? Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(5), 473-479. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2014.06.003 Objective – To determine how much of the literature in a library and information science (LIS) periodical collection qualifies as research. Design – Content analysis. Setting – The LIS periodicals collection of an academic library that supports an established LIS graduate program at a college in the United States of America. Subjects – Of the 177 identified periodicals with LIS content that fell within project scope from the local collection, researchers analyzed 101 journals that include academic/scholarly content and an additional 4 journals with relevant trade content. This study excluded open access (OA) journals. Methods – Using the most recent issue of each subject journal from the fiscal year 2012-2013, the authors performed a content analysis on all indexed content items, and then classified each content item as research or non-research. For content identified as research, researchers identified the research method (or methods) used. The data collection tool also captured identifying information and keywords for all content. Main Results – Within the journals meeting the scope of this study, researchers identified 1,880 articles from 105 individual journal issues. Only 16% (n=307) of articles met the authors’ established definition to qualify as research. Within the subset of research articles, the authors further identified 45% (n=139) that used a single research method. An additional 36% (n=112) of identified research articles used two research methods and 15% (n=46) used three methods, with the remainder using four or more methods. Surveys were the most frequently used research method, accounting for 49% (n=66) of the single method studies. The researchers discovered that surveys remained popular even in mixed-method studies, with 21% (n=117) of all identified research articles using surveys. This is closely followed by 20% (n=109) of studies reported as using the general category of “other” methods, for research that did not meet one of the predefined methods. The next two most popular identified methods were case studies at 13% (n=73), followed by content analyses at 13% (n=71). For the eight other research methods identified, none saw a frequency above 10%. Focus groups and usability studies tied for the least frequently used method among the 307 articles, both at 2% (n=9). The keyword analysis focused on two categories, one for research article keywords and another for non-research article keywords, for all 1,880 articles identified. Non-research articles had less reliance on keywords, with authors reporting keywords appearing on 73% (n=1156). Within these, authors discovered 120 separate keywords used 10 or more times across non-research articles. The top ten keywords among non-research articles were reported as primarily related to books and publishing, with “non-fiction,” “adult,” and “libraries” as the top three. By comparison, research articles heavily favour the use of keywords, with 94% (n=290) of research articles having keywords. Analysis of the individual keywords found 56 keywords appearing 10 or more times across research articles. The top ten keywords are primarily practice related, with “information,” “libraries,” and “library” being the top three. When comparing shared keywords across both categories, the same top three keywords reported for research in the previous sentence apply to the collective set. Conclusion – The authors note that the nature and size of the local collection both benefited and limited this study. Compiling and maintaining a comprehensive list of LIS periodicals is a challenging task across a large body of potential sources. Within the resulting periodicals studied, a mere 16% of analyzed LIS literature met the criteria to qualify as research, and that only after the study had eliminated virtually all trade periodicals from the population. Had that trade literature been included, the percentage qualifying as research would have been even lower. The popularity of surveys as a research method among LIS research reflects other recent findings, though the frequency of studies falling into the general “other” category suggests that LIS research is changing. Based on this research, the authors conclude that there is still much to be learned from content analysis of literature published in LIS periodicals. Future analyses could further examine the frequency of research methods used within LIS research.


Author(s):  
Ertambang Nahartyo ◽  
Intiyas Utami

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the development of management accounting research from three perspectives: reserach topics, theoretical foundations, and research methods. We base our discussion on previous literature reviews in the US, Australia, China, Finland, and other countries. We propose research opportunities in the field of management accounting in Indonesia. We argue that certain topics such as budgeting, performance evaluation, and management accounting techniques implementation are still interesting topics to study further in Indonesia context. As many studies have supported theoretical and practical development, we conjecture that management accounting research in Indonesia should be conducted to answer the question of ‘what does happen’ instead of ‘what should happen’. In line with the conjecture, we contend that research is to focus on practicality aspects and the endeavor to find new frontiers in management accounting practice.Keywords: management accounting research, management accounting theory


2012 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 92-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniël Coetsee ◽  
Nerine Stegmann

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the profile of accounting research in the two academic accounting research journals in South Africa (Meditari Accountancy Research and SA Journal of Accounting Research) during the ten‐year period from 2000 to 2009.Design/methodology/approachThe archival research method is applied, which analyses existing data (in this case the articles published in the South African (SA) accounting research journals) to come to research conclusions. The research method used to analyse the related articles in the SA accounting research journals is based on various international studies. The following dimensions are assessed: authorship; research field; the nature of the research; and research methods. Authorship is classified by institution, and the top seven authors by relative contribution are also identified. Both empirical and theoretical work are classified separately in different research methods.FindingsThese different dimensions provide a broad‐based review of the current profile of accounting research in South Africa.Research limitations/implicationsOther refereed academic articles in the field of accounting have been published in non‐accounting specific SAPSE‐approved journals. These articles are also excluded from the scope of this research since the journals in which they are published have not been established by accounting academics specifically.Practical implicationsThe motivation for doing this research is to identify the current profile of accounting research in South Africa that could be used as a basis for future research‐related development.Originality/valueKnowledge of the profile of accounting research in South Africa could provide opportunities for scholars to expand identified research areas and explore methods that are currently under‐developed in the South African accountancy research field. The paper also acknowledges the contributions by the most prolific authors in the identified journals.


2002 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
David E. Sprott ◽  
Anthony D. Miyazaki

The authors examine the first 20 years of Journal of Public Policy & Marketing (JPP&M) to understand the nature, influences, and impact of marketing and public policy research published in the journal. After discussing the history of JPP&M, the authors report three related sets of analyses based on all articles published since the journal's inception. Specifically, a content analysis examines the scope and depth of research topics over time. Next, publication analyses assess how various authors and institutions have influenced the field through publishing in the journal. Finally, a citation analysis shows the impact of JPP&M articles on research published in journals of related fields.


Author(s):  
Friederike Wall ◽  
Stephan Leitner

Agent-based computational economics (ACE) - while adopted comparably widely in other domains of managerial science - is a rather novel paradigm for management accounting research (MAR). This paper provides an overview of opportunities and difficulties that ACE may have for research in management accounting and, in particular, introduces a framework that researchers in management accounting may employ when considering ACE as a paradigm for their particular research endeavor. The framework builds on the two interrelated paradigmatic elements of ACE: a set of theoretical assumptions on economic agents and the approach of agent-based modeling. Particular focus is put on contrasting opportunities and difficulties of ACE in comparison to other research methods employed in MAR.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document