Bridging the Research Expectations Gap Between Accounting Researchers and Practitioners

Justice, Scot E.; Ramamoorti, Sridhar; Showalter, D. Scott; Krull, George W.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.4205646

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The second-most-selected obstacle is that practitioners do not read academic journals (70 percent). As demonstrated by Burton et al (2022) and Justice et al (2022), the participants are correct. Participant comments suggest that academic journals are irrelevant to practice because they publish studies that answer questions that practitioners do not care about.…”

Section: Another Respondent Wrotementioning

confidence: 81%

“…5 These data suggest that most accounting academics likely perceive that they conduct an abundance of application research relevant to practice. However, given that accounting practitioners have largely disassociated themselves with accounting academics (Swieringa 2019) and rarely read academic journals (Justice et al 2022), it is likely that these perceptions are not well-aligned with reality. Evans, Burritt, and Guthrie (2011) noted that more communication and direct contact are necessary among academics, practitioners, and policy makers to improve the relevance and quality of accounting research.…”

Section: Identifying Questions Of Interest To Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Asking accounting practitioners how often they read academic research, Burton et al (2021, 11) found that 31 percent read academic research "essentially never. " Justice, Ramamoorti, Showalter, and Krull (2022) estimated that only about 8 percent of public accountants read academic accounting journals (e.g., The Accounting Review, Accounting Horizons, Behavioral Research in Accounting, Journal of the American Taxation Association, Current Issues in Auditing). Practitioners mostly read practitioner-focused journals like Tax Advisor, Journal of Accountancy, Internal Auditor, and state CPA society publications (Justice et al 2022).…”

Section: Journal and Editor Interestsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Perceived Obstacles to Conducting and Publishing Practice-Relevant Academic Accounting Research

Daugherty

Dickins

Pitman

et al. 2023

Accounting and the Public Interest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If academic accounting research is not of interest to practicing accountants and regulators, public interest wanes, the academy becomes an echo chamber of its own ideas, and researchers risk relevancy and financial support. To provide insight about the obstacles perceived to reduce the likelihood that accounting academics will publish practice-relevant research in academic journals, we sent a survey to more than 5,600 US accounting faculty members. Based on 567 survey responses, we identify eight obstacles that the survey respondents believe reduce the likelihood they will publish practice-relevant research. The most frequently reported obstacle is that academic journal editors are not interested in publishing practice-related research (77 percent of survey respondents). We also provide evidence that the more academics interact with practitioners, the more likely they are to conduct and publish practice-relevant academic research. Recommendations and observations are included to help address the identified obstacles.

show abstract

Section: Another Respondent Wrotementioning

confidence: 81%

Section: Identifying Questions Of Interest To Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Journal and Editor Interestsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Perceived Obstacles to Conducting and Publishing Practice-Relevant Academic Accounting Research

Daugherty

Dickins

Pitman

et al. 2023

Accounting and the Public Interest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Accounting Horizons Revised Editorial Policy: A Renewed Focus on Practice Problems of Real Consequence

Showalter

Wilks

2021

Accounting Horizons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

W e are pleased to introduce ourselves as the new co-senior editors of Accounting Horizons and describe the revised editorial policy of the journal. By way of introduction, Scott is a retired KPMG audit partner who now works as a professor of practice and director of the Master of Accounting Program at North Carolina State University. At KPMG, he served in many roles, including as the managing partner of the Assurance and Advisory Services Center and in the Department of Professional Practice-Risk Management. Jeff is the EY Professor of Accounting and former director of the Brigham Young University School of Accountancy. He worked as an academic fellow and the revenue recognition project manager at the Financial Accounting Standards Board and as a technical consultant to the International Accounting Standards Board. He has also provided consulting expertise in litigation matters for the SEC and a number of large public companies. Both of us currently serve on audit committees and have served in various AAA leadership and committee roles.As you can see, our backgrounds lean heavily toward accounting practice. In fact, we believe these backgrounds have given us a unique perspective on the connections between the academy and the accounting profession. Although there are some significant recent efforts in the academy to improve these connections, we feel strongly that more can be done on the research front. Indeed, the academy can and should do more to address practice problems of real consequence, and this can only happen as we invest the time to rigorously describe these problems and then apply sound methods and theories to help resolve them

show abstract

Relevance of Accounting Research (ROAR) Scores: Ratings of Titles and Abstracts by Accounting Professionals

Burton

Summers

Wilks

et al. 2021

Accounting Horizons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relevance of academic accounting research to practice has been frequently discussed in the accounting academy, yet very little data has been put forth in these discussions. We create Relevance of Accounting Research (ROAR) scores by asking accounting professionals to read and evaluate the titles and abstracts of every article published in 12 leading accounting journals for the years 2016 to 2018, inclusive. These scores allow for an evidence-based evaluation and discussion of how academic accounting research is perceived by accounting professionals. The scores also allow us to identify the articles, authors, journals, and accounting topic areas that are perceived to be more relevant to accounting practice. By continuing to produce these scores in perpetuity, we expect this data to help academics and professionals better identify and utilize research relevant to the accounting profession.

show abstract

Bridging the Research Expectations Gap Between Accounting Researchers and Practitioners

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Perceived Obstacles to Conducting and Publishing Practice-Relevant Academic Accounting Research

Perceived Obstacles to Conducting and Publishing Practice-Relevant Academic Accounting Research

Accounting Horizons Revised Editorial Policy: A Renewed Focus on Practice Problems of Real Consequence

Relevance of Accounting Research (ROAR) Scores: Ratings of Titles and Abstracts by Accounting Professionals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About