The hand that rocks the cradle: Disciplinary socialization at the American Accounting Association's Doctoral Consortium

Fogarty, Timothy J.; Jonas, Gregory A.

doi:10.1016/j.cpa.2010.02.003

Cited by 29 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Along with articles having many sections, some articles lacked seemingly crucial sections, such as a formal 'Conclusion'; in AOS see Cianci and Kaplan (2010); O'Donnell and Prather-Kinsey (2010); and Schultz Jr et al (2010) and in CPA see Cooper et al (2010); Fogarty and Jonas (2010); Pipan and Czarniawska (2010); Sikka and Willmott (2010);. However, the final sections of these articles include some of the elements of a typical conclusion section, for example, Cianci and Kaplan (2010) devote their final paragraph to outlining their research limitations and their previous two paragraphs to summarizing their findings.…”

Section: Construction Of An Articlementioning

confidence: 99%

Construction of research articles in the leading interdisciplinary accounting journals

Villiers

Dumay

2013

Acc Auditing Accountability J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To examine the construction of articles published in three highly ranked interdisciplinary accounting journals. Design/methodology/approach: We base our analysis on articles published during 2010 in Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal (AAAJ), Accounting, Organizations and Society (AOS) and Critical Perspectives on Accounting (CPA). In doing so, we develop a framework and examine characteristics of the published articles, including the prose. Findings: Based on the construction of accounting academic articles in the highly ranked interdisciplinary journals, we introduce a simplified concept of the five distinct major parts of an article. We also make some taken-for-granted aspects of article construction explicit and we conclude that alternatives, if used effectively, can add to the quality of an article. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of, and a reflection on, how the taken-for-granted rules of academic publishing can be challenged. Research limitations/implications:This article is limited by the authors' own analysis and interpretations of AAAJ, AOS and CPA articles published during 2010. Originality/value: As far as can be ascertained, we are the first to examine the construction of research articles published in high ranking interdisciplinary accounting journals. The paper can assist emerging scholars in the process of planning and writing their own articles. For seasoned researchers, our insights may serve to reaffirm or help further develop their approach. The paper also contributes to the ongoing debate around the pressure to publish, the measurement of publications, and the difficulties of getting published.Key words: Academic publishing; writing; research; article attributes Acknowledgements:We would like to thank the many people who have given us feedback during the development of this paper. Foremost we would like to thank James Guthrie for his support and insightful critique on several versions of this paper. Also, thanks to Lee Parker for his support and encouragement during the review process along with the insights from our two anonymous reviewers who have contributed to improving the quality of the paper in among other ways by suggesting additional avenues of investigation. Thanks also to Helen Sword (University of Auckland) and Imad Moosa (RMIT University) for their comments on early drafts of the paper. Also thanks to the comments, observations and encouragement from the participants of numerous workshops and seminars where we have been invited to present our work, even though it was unpublished and still in development. The list includes,

show abstract

Section: Construction Of An Articlementioning

confidence: 99%

Construction of research articles in the leading interdisciplinary accounting journals

Villiers

Dumay

2013

Acc Auditing Accountability J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hopwood 2007; Khalifa and Quattrone 2008;Lukka 2010) and follows the appeals voiced by Hopwood (2008) to sustain debate on the issues at stake. Part of this literature has focussed on the socialisation of PhD students, however, mostly in US accounting academia (Schwartz et al 2005;Fogarty and Jonas 2010). The paper by Schwartz et al (2005) is closest to our study as the authors present the results of a survey they carried out in fall 1999 among 151 accounting students from selected US doctoral programs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Research diversity in accounting doctoral education: survey results from the German-speaking countries

Pelger

Grottke

2017

Bus Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

US positivistic accounting research is increasingly perceived as having come to be the point of reference for researchers in other countries, including the German-speaking area where formerly normative research was widespread. In this paper, we present the survey results retrieved from 293 doctoral students in accounting in 2009, a period of transition in which old and new approaches to doctoral education co-existed. Specifically, doctoral students were subject to institutional change in the form of more structured doctoral studies and a focus on internationalisation and attempts to publish in academic journals. We find that at that time there was diversity with regard to both the set of accounting journals considered by doctoral students and the methods employed by the latter in their dissertations. With respect to research methods, we show that factors of the institutional setting reflecting a more structured and international approach to doctoral education are in particular linked to empirical quantitative, and to a lesser extent qualitative, research.

show abstract

“…In Information Systems, for example, they are formally recognized as a critical component of doctoral education and as a “significant pedagogical tool and mechanism of disciplinary socialization” (Gable, Smyth, and Gable, , p. 679). Ensuring that doctoral consortia do not simply focus on disciplinary socialization is, however, important (Fogarty and Jonas, ). While the execution of a consortium can vary across disciplines, they tend to share certain characteristics, including: A focus on doctoral students at some point in their dissertation work (the focus from early to late‐stage students seems to be one variable across disciplines). A “workshop” feel suggesting some intimacy and a “roll up the sleeves” approach to helping students with their work. A positive, constructive atmosphere different from the at‐times combative climate characterizing academic conference presentations. The presence of luminaries in the field, giving students both a chance to receive high quality advice on their work and to begin building their personal networks with top current and future scholars. A compressed format, usually spanning just 1–2 days. …”

Section: Doctoral Consortia: More Than Small Conferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

From the Editors: Reflecting on the Value of a Doctoral Consortium

Noble¹,

Spanjol²

2020

J of Product Innov Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The hand that rocks the cradle: Disciplinary socialization at the American Accounting Association's Doctoral Consortium

Cited by 29 publications

References 49 publications

Construction of research articles in the leading interdisciplinary accounting journals

Construction of research articles in the leading interdisciplinary accounting journals

Research diversity in accounting doctoral education: survey results from the German-speaking countries

From the Editors: Reflecting on the Value of a Doctoral Consortium

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About