Diversity and validity in positivist management accounting research—A longitudinal perspective over four decades

A long-term bibliometric analysis of journals influencing management accounting and control research

“…Regardless of database, we observe a substantial increase in the number of articles returning the keywords. This is in line with Lachmann et al (2017) and Herschung et al (2018). The 12,014 and 42,925 articles found in the respective databases are mainlypublished in the journals presented in Fig.…”

“…Yet indeed, selecting specialist journals might only be considered a problem as far as their topics are heading towards a dead-end street, something that is not necessarily is the case. Lachmann et al (2017) study positivist management accounting research (PMAR) over four decades in 'nine leading accounting journals' and conclude that both diversity and validity have increased over time. Nevertheless, they also conclude, with reference to Baldvinsdottir et al (2010), that the range of topics researched has become narrower, focusing more on control issues such as social implications more than technical details, i.e.…”

Psychology in management accounting and control research: an overview of the recent literature

“…Regarding recent developments, we confirm the trends indicated by prior studies (e.g., Hesford et al 2007;Hopper and Bui 2016;Lachmann et al 2017) 1 3…”

“…For decades, management accounting and control (MAC) researchers have employed a diverse set of economic theories and sociological or organizational approaches to predict and examine behavior and decision-making (Hesford et al 2007;Hopper and Bui 2016;Lachmann et al 2017). Previous literature studies illuminate applications of specific subfields of psychology in MAC research.…”

Journal of Management Accounting Research at 30 Years: Reflections on Its Context, Creation, Challenges, and Contributions

“…Even a casual perusal of the journal leaves the impression that quality increased over time as more articles explicitly considered issues affecting the validity of research. This includes increasing: theoretical validity, for example how to integrate theories and use theories to make valid predictions (e.g., Covaleski et al 2003;Shields 2003, 2014;Shields 2018); and empirical validity (increasing the external, construct, internal, and statistical-conclusion validities of positivist research) (Birnberg et al 1990;Shields 2003, 2014;Lachmann, I. Trapp, and R. Trapp 2017;Shields 2018).…”