Revealing Research Themes and Trends in 30 Top‐ranking Accounting Journals: A Text‐mining Approach

Zengul, Ferhat; Oner, Nurettin; Byrd, James D.; Savage, Arline

doi:10.1111/abac.12214

Cited by 15 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 118 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with prior reviews in the accounting discipline, we initially defined our review scope using the Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) journal quality list and the Chartered Association of Business Schools’ Academic Journal Guide (AJG), which are commonly used as measures of journal quality and research performance (Alhossini et al, 2021; de Villiers & Hsiao, 2018; He et al, 2021; Kotb et al, 2020; Zengul et al, 2021). To mitigate criticisms associated with peer‐based journal rankings (Guthrie et al, 2019), we broadened our scope to include journals in the top two quartiles of the SCImago Journal Rank Indicator (SJR) metric.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review and synthesis of contemporary sustainability accounting research and the development of a research agenda

Hsiao

Villiers

Horner

et al. 2022

Accounting & Finance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study provides a comprehensive overview of contemporary sustainability accounting research, comprising 1,283 academic articles published in 54 journals (2014)(2015)(2016)(2017)(2018)(2019)(2020). Sustainability disclosure is the most frequently researched topic and a substantial proportion of publications analyse a national setting, examine a European context, investigate listed firms, adopt an empirical archival research method, apply social and political theories, or focus broadly on sustainability. Based on this analysis, we develop a conceptual framework of sustainability accounting influences. We discuss prevalent themes, empirical findings and apparent inconsistencies, reflecting on recent trends and the state of sustainability accounting knowledge, developing an agenda for future research.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review and synthesis of contemporary sustainability accounting research and the development of a research agenda

Hsiao

Villiers

Horner

et al. 2022

Accounting & Finance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is strong anecdotal evidence that poor corporate governance practices are associated with corporate failure, as was seen in the financial scandals of Enron, WorldCom and other high profile bankruptcies [21]. While corporate governance has been a rapidly growing area of the literature (Zengul et al ., 2021), there is comparatively little research that has investigated the relationship between corporate governance attributes (such as board composition and shareholder ownership/concentration) and corporate failure [22]. In an early study, Gilson (1990) reported that corporate default engenders significant changes in the ownership of firms' residual claims and in the allocation of rights to manage corporate resources.…”

Section: The Role Of Predictor Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A literature survey of corporate failure prediction models

Jones

2023

JAL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study updates the literature review of Jones (1987) published in this journal. The study pays particular attention to two important themes that have shaped the field over the past 35 years: (1) the development of a range of innovative new statistical learning methods, particularly advanced machine learning methods such as stochastic gradient boosting, adaptive boosting, random forests and deep learning, and (2) the emergence of a wide variety of bankruptcy predictor variables extending beyond traditional financial ratios, including market-based variables, earnings management proxies, auditor going concern opinions (GCOs) and corporate governance attributes. Several directions for future research are discussed.Design/methodology/approachThis study provides a systematic review of the corporate failure literature over the past 35 years with a particular focus on the emergence of new statistical learning methodologies and predictor variables. This synthesis of the literature evaluates the strength and limitations of different modelling approaches under different circumstances and provides an overall evaluation the relative contribution of alternative predictor variables. The study aims to provide a transparent, reproducible and interpretable review of the literature. The literature review also takes a theme-centric rather than author-centric approach and focuses on structured themes that have dominated the literature since 1987.FindingsThere are several major findings of this study. First, advanced machine learning methods appear to have the most promise for future firm failure research. Not only do these methods predict significantly better than conventional models, but they also possess many appealing statistical properties. Second, there are now a much wider range of variables being used to model and predict firm failure. However, the literature needs to be interpreted with some caution given the many mixed findings. Finally, there are still a number of unresolved methodological issues arising from the Jones (1987) study that still requiring research attention.Originality/valueThe study explains the connections and derivations between a wide range of firm failure models, from simpler linear models to advanced machine learning methods such as gradient boosting, random forests, adaptive boosting and deep learning. The paper highlights the most promising models for future research, particularly in terms of their predictive power, underlying statistical properties and issues of practical implementation. The study also draws together an extensive literature on alternative predictor variables and provides insights into the role and behaviour of alternative predictor variables in firm failure research.

show abstract

“…Over the decades, corporate social responsibility (CSR) has gained extensive attention from academics and practitioners (Zengul et al, 2021). CSR refers to firm activities that go beyond economic and legal requirements and serve social good in connection with stakeholders such as charitable donations (Deniz & Suarez, 2005; Marques et al, 2014; McWilliams & Siegel, 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, we add to the increasing literature on CSR (Zengul et al, 2021) by identifying the board chair as an important determinant. Several existing studies investigate how CEO characteristics determine CSR (Agle et al, 1999; Cronqvist & Yu, 2017; Deckop et al, 2006; Galaskiewicz, 1997; Petrenko et al, 2016; Waldman et al, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An axe to grind: Family outsiders and firms doing good

Jiang

Zheng

2023

Corporate Governance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research Question/IssueThis paper examines the relationship between having nonfamily members (i.e., family outsiders) as board chairs and corporate philanthropy.Research Findings/InsightsIn a hand‐collected dataset of Chinese family firms, we find that firms invest less in philanthropy when the board chair is a nonfamily member. However, this impact is mitigated when the chair's discretion is restricted, as in highly visible firms or firms controlled by the founding family. The negative relation between nonfamily chairs and corporate philanthropy is also weaker when the interest of chairs is more aligned with that of the controlling family, where chairs are inside‐promoted or members of founding team, when board chairs and the families have more goal consistency, when stakeholders have higher demands for corporate social responsibility or investors care less about profitability. Further analysis shows that nonfamily chairs help firms reduce overinvestment in philanthropy, the board chair has a more salient effect than the CEO on philanthropic giving, and the results are not driven by expropriation issues of the controlling family.Theoretical/Academic ImplicationsOur study highlights the heterogeneity of board chairs in family firms, board chair's significant influence on a firm's social performance, and the agency problem related with the board chair, which are all underexplored topics in prior literature.Practitioner/Policy ImplicationsOur evidence offers insights to practitioners about the impact of board chairs on corporate philanthropy. Family firms need pay attention to the recruitment of board chairs and hold a comprehensive view of family firm professionalization as a nonfamily board chair might negatively affect firms' stakeholder relationship management but bring benefits by mitigating excess philanthropic activities. Besides, practitioners shall be aware of agency problems originating from board chairs. Incentives or monitoring over chairs might be useful to address potential conflicts of interest.

show abstract

Revealing Research Themes and Trends in 30 Top‐ranking Accounting Journals: A Text‐mining Approach

Cited by 15 publications

References 118 publications

A review and synthesis of contemporary sustainability accounting research and the development of a research agenda

A review and synthesis of contemporary sustainability accounting research and the development of a research agenda

A literature survey of corporate failure prediction models

An axe to grind: Family outsiders and firms doing good

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About