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

Abstract

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.

Assessing the impact of environmental accounting research: evidence from citation and journal data

“…Indeed, while research assessment is increasingly based on quantitative metrics of citations, IF and journal rankings (Aistleitner et al , 2018), a growing number of voices are demanding a more holistic assessment of research (RQ+ Assessment Framework, the Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), the Leiden Manifesto for research metrics, etc.). Accounting research is not exempt from these reflections (Burton et al , 2021a; Dechow et al , 2020), to the point where the question of its relevance is openly raised (Burton et al , 2021a). To fuel this debate, our study focuses on the quantitative indicators used to measure the impact of accounting research and on one particularly prolific accounting specialized area – environmental accounting.…”

“…4. The “top 5” accounting journals are Accounting, Organizations and Society , Contemporary Accounting Research , Journal of Accounting and Economics , Journal of Accounting Research and The Accounting Review (Beets et al , 2015; Bonner et al , 2006; Burton et al , 2021a; Chan and Liano, 2009; Templeton and Lewis, 2015). …”

“…From a sociological perspective, Kahlifa and Quattrone argue that “one needs the “knowledge of accounting knowledge” (Quattrone, 2000), a recursive process of questioning […]” (2008, p. 79). In addition, the relevance and impact of accounting research is a growing question within accounting academia (Burton et al , 2021a; Dechow et al , 2020; Showalter and Wilks, 2021). Finally, we note that citation patterns differ substantially across disciplines (Burton et al , 2021b; Leydesdorff and Shin, 2011), which calls for a more detailed analysis specifically focused on accounting.…”

“…Regarding the activities of researchers, we use author citations – the “traditional” measure of impact (Burton et al , 2021a). While citations generated by scholars are not necessarily a measure of quality, they are widely accepted by the academic community as a measure for impact (Leydesdorff and Shin, 2011; Meyer et al , 2018).…”

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

“…Fraser and Sheehy (2020) reported that more than half of practicing accountants never read articles published in academic journals. Burton, Summers, Wilks, and Wood (2022) asked 800 accounting practitioners whether, based on reading the abstracts of 1,254 articles published in 12 of the leading academic accounting journals from 2016 to 2018, they were interested in reading the full article. They found that about half of the articles were of interest to practitioners.…”