The Familiarity with and Perceived Quality of Accounting Journals: Views of Senior Accounting Faculty in Leading U. S. MBA Programs

Abstract

Determining familiarity with and evaluating quality of accounting journals are of interest to various parties in accounting academia. In recent years, the number of accounting journals has grown, and many special-interest subgroups have arisen. A study surveys senior faculty at Business Week's best 40 MBA programs to determine their familiarity with and quality perceptions of 44 accounting journals. As to familiarity, 5 journals were nearly universally known, and a total of 15 had wide recognition. Financial, managerial, and auditing faculty exhibited similar familiarity patterns, while tax faculty had a somewhat different pattern. As to quality perceptions, relatively few journals achieved high quality evaluations. There was, however, general consensus across the different subject area faculty as to the top journals. Special consideration was given to the new (post-1980) journals. Six of the 19 newer journals in the study achieved high familiarity scores, and 3 achieved high quality evaluations.