Network analysis in accounting research: an institutional and geographical perspective

Abstract

PurposeThe objective of this study is to explore the accounting research network among institutions and countries globally and to contribute to the knowledge development in accounting discipline across regions with a novel and original approach.Design/methodology/approachThis study has been conducted by manually collecting data from 10,863 papers published in 22 accounting journals indexed in the Web of Science (WoS) for the period 2000–2016. Analyses and visualizations of collaborative networks across institutions and regions were performed by using network analysis software packages, including Pajek, UCINET 6, NetDraw and VOSviewer.FindingsThe study finds that the most productive five universities are the University of New South Wales, University of Sydney, University of Texas, University of California and University of Manchester worldwide. In accordance with the institution ranking, the five most productive countries in all periods are the USA, the UK, Australia, Spain and Canada. However, in addition to these countries, it is important to note that some European and Asian countries and New Zealand from Oceania are among the most productive countries which host prolific institutions. Furthermore, network indicators show that the UK is the most influential actor in centrality and brokerage within the research network. We should note that Australia is also among the most influential nations with its influential institutions. In all research metrics, the dominance of Anglophone countries (e.g. the USA, the UK and Australia) is observable on which language advantage might play a role since most internationally accredited journals publish scientific articles in English.Research limitations/implicationsThe study is bounded with several main limitations. First, due to collecting the data manually, there might be some inherent limitations. Second, the study is constrained by the time frame between 2000 and 2016. The study does not answer why and how questions in investigating research productivity and effectiveness in the network. Our study might inspire new studies to complement ours by considering these constraints.Practical implicationsOur findings indicated the prominent institution-wide and country-wide actors; thus, the results provide a global perspective on the collaboration network. Second, our findings guide job seekers, who are particularly research-oriented, to potential recruiters around the world both at the institution level and country level. Third, the results might play an important role in forming institution-based and country-based research policies. The USA, among others, is a particularly important actor in productivity, whereas the UK, among others, is a remarkable country in centrality and brokerage in the research network. By examining the policies of these two countries, other nations might shape their research strategies, promotion policies and support and reward schemes. Fourth, cross-institution and in particular cross-country collaborations are imperative in the diversity of accounting research as they blend culturally diverse researchers. Fifth, prominent institutions highlighted in this study might be adopted as role models by other institutions in the same country and benefit their expertise in productivity and cooperation by scrutinizing their approaches. Sixth, our findings and metrics might be adopted as benchmarks for institutions and nations for performance evaluation. Considering our 5-year period indicators, institutions can set targets for their improvement and for measuring the progress. We provide other important implications in the conclusion section of the study.Originality/valueTo the best knowledge of the authors, no study yet investigated the collaboration across academic institutions, regions, and countries in accounting discipline to this extent. Therefore, our research provides a significant contribution to the literature by seeking a comprehensive network analysis of authorship patterns from an institutional and geographical perspective. Doing so, we contribute to knowledge development in accounting discipline with institutional and geographical network analyses.

Mapping the state of expanded audit reporting: a bibliometric view

“…The top ten countries in EAR literature are presented in Table 5 regarding the number of citations. Similar to Uyar et al (2020b), Bartolacci et al (2021) and Lamboglia et al (2021), the results show that the USA is the leading country in EAR research. This priority is not too far-fetched because the US economy is the largest in the world, and many US universities and researchers spend many efforts (time and money) on their research every year.…”

Unveiling research productivity of premier IIMs of India (2010–2021)

“…In their evaluation of Mizoram University's research output from 2004-2017, conducted by Yadav et al (2020), they found that the university published an average of 18.93 research papers annually, with the majority of those (54 papers) falling under the category of biological science. Uyar et al (2020) conducted a study of 10,863 accounting related documents from 22 journals that were extracted from the WoS database for the period 2000-2016. According to the analysis, the University of New South Wales was the most productive institution and the USA is the most prolific country in terms of publishing output.…”

“…(2020), they found that the university published an average of 18.93 research papers annually, with the majority of those (54 papers) falling under the category of biological science. Uyar et al. (2020) conducted a study of 10,863 accounting related documents from 22 journals that were extracted from the WoS database for the period 2000–2016.…”

International scientific conference "New Challenges in Economic and Business Development – 2021: Post-Crisis Economy" : Proceedings

“…Researchers are analysing also different fields and specialities, for example, network analysis in accounting research with deep analysis on institutional and geographical perspective (Uyar, Kılıç, Köeoğlu, 2020), gender importance as well as gender and network effects on occupation (Fung, 2020), on hiring discrimination against transgender job applicants -considerations when designing a study (McFadden, 2020), on life outside the garment factories: the lived experiences of factory workers (McKay, McKenzie, 2020). The mentioned factors are considered as important aspects influencing job seekers.…”