2021
DOI: 10.1111/acfi.12751
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Accounting for intangibles and intellectual capital: a literature review from 2000 to 2020

Abstract: This article presents the results of a systematic literature review on intangibles and intellectual capital (IC) focusing on articles published in the top 20 accounting journals between 2000 and 2020. We find that North American accounting scholarship during this period has predominantly focused on identifiable intangibles and how these appear in the balance sheet. Much less attention has been given to management issues and IC, even though these issues are more common in European and Australian accounting lite… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 124 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We adopt a systematic literature review supported by a bibliometric analysis to assess the state of the art on gender diversity at the top of the firm hierarchy (Massaro et al , 2016; Bellucci et al , 2022). This systematic literature review is based on a rigorous plan to identify relevant articles and thus assure the quality of the analysis (Garanina et al , 2021). The bibliometric visualization supports us in recognizing the prevailing trends on this topic, considering the large final sample (Amorelli and García‐Sánchez, 2021; Bellucci et al , 2022).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We adopt a systematic literature review supported by a bibliometric analysis to assess the state of the art on gender diversity at the top of the firm hierarchy (Massaro et al , 2016; Bellucci et al , 2022). This systematic literature review is based on a rigorous plan to identify relevant articles and thus assure the quality of the analysis (Garanina et al , 2021). The bibliometric visualization supports us in recognizing the prevailing trends on this topic, considering the large final sample (Amorelli and García‐Sánchez, 2021; Bellucci et al , 2022).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This paper argues that CAS, IFRS, and U.S. GAAP constitute the three major accounting standards in the world since China and the U.S. are the top two economic entities globally, and IFRS has been widely adopted in many European and other countries. More importantly, these standards have only minor differences in terms of the definitions and recognition of intangible assets (Garanina et al, 2021).…”
Section: Data As Intangible Assetsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Various studies on IAS 38: Intangible Assets and the FASB Summary of Statement No. 142 reveal how the accounting standards fail to comprehensively measure and account for intangible assets [11,17]. This has resulted in a significant difference between the real value of firms and the book values, which are significantly low.…”
Section: Concept Of Intangibles and Intellectual Capitalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The quest to link intangibles or intellectual capital to corporate financial performance is not a new area of interest. Several review articles have explored the different studies conducted on intellectual capital, but what is so clear is the inconclusiveness of the findings, which beg for further studies to provide an eclectic understanding of the issues [9,[12][13][14][15][16][17][18]. For instance, many studies have been conducted on developed economies, such as countries in the European Union and North America, for instance.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%