Research-practice gap in accounting journals? A topic modeling approach

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
F. Federsel, Rolf Uwe Fülbier, Jan Seitz
{"title":"Research-practice gap in accounting journals? A topic modeling approach","authors":"F. Federsel, Rolf Uwe Fülbier, Jan Seitz","doi":"10.1108/jal-03-2023-0047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeA gap between research and practice is commonly perceived throughout accounting academia. However, empirical evidence on the magnitude of this detachment remains scarce. The authors provide new evidence to the ongoing debate by introducing a novel topic-based approach to capture the research-practice gap and quantify its extent. They also explore regional differences in the research-practice gap.Design/methodology/approachThe authors apply the unsupervised machine learning approach Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) to compare the topical composition of 2,251 articles from six premier research, practice and bridging journals from the USA and Europe between 2009 and 2019. The authors extend the existing methods of summarizing literature and develop metrics that allow researchers to evaluate the research-practice gap. The authors conduct a plethora of additional analyses to corroborate the findings.FindingsThe results substantiate a pronounced topic-related research-practice gap in accounting literature and document its statistical significance. Moreover, the authors uncover that this gap is more pronounced in the USA than in Europe, highlighting the importance of institutional differences between academic communities.Practical implicationsThe authors objectify the debate about the extent of a research-practice gap and stimulate further discussions about explanations and consequences.Originality/valueTo the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first paper to deploy a rigorous machine learning approach to measure a topic-based research-practice gap in the accounting literature. Additionally, the authors provide theoretical rationales for the extent and regional differences in the research-practice gap.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jal-03-2023-0047","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PurposeA gap between research and practice is commonly perceived throughout accounting academia. However, empirical evidence on the magnitude of this detachment remains scarce. The authors provide new evidence to the ongoing debate by introducing a novel topic-based approach to capture the research-practice gap and quantify its extent. They also explore regional differences in the research-practice gap.Design/methodology/approachThe authors apply the unsupervised machine learning approach Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) to compare the topical composition of 2,251 articles from six premier research, practice and bridging journals from the USA and Europe between 2009 and 2019. The authors extend the existing methods of summarizing literature and develop metrics that allow researchers to evaluate the research-practice gap. The authors conduct a plethora of additional analyses to corroborate the findings.FindingsThe results substantiate a pronounced topic-related research-practice gap in accounting literature and document its statistical significance. Moreover, the authors uncover that this gap is more pronounced in the USA than in Europe, highlighting the importance of institutional differences between academic communities.Practical implicationsThe authors objectify the debate about the extent of a research-practice gap and stimulate further discussions about explanations and consequences.Originality/valueTo the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first paper to deploy a rigorous machine learning approach to measure a topic-based research-practice gap in the accounting literature. Additionally, the authors provide theoretical rationales for the extent and regional differences in the research-practice gap.
会计期刊研究实践差距?主题建模方法
目的研究和实践之间的差距在整个会计学术界普遍存在。然而,关于这种脱离程度的经验证据仍然很少。作者通过引入一种新的基于主题的方法来捕捉研究实践差距并量化其程度,为正在进行的辩论提供了新的证据。他们还探讨了研究实践差距的地区差异。设计/方法论/方法作者应用无监督机器学习方法潜在狄利克雷分配(LDA)来比较2009年至2019年间来自美国和欧洲六家主要研究、实践和桥接期刊的2251篇文章的主题组成。作者扩展了现有的文献总结方法,并制定了指标,使研究人员能够评估研究实践差距。作者进行了大量的额外分析来证实这些发现。研究结果证实了会计文献中与主题相关的研究实践差距,并证明了其统计学意义。此外,作者发现,这种差距在美国比在欧洲更为明显,这突出了学术界之间制度差异的重要性。实践含义作者将关于研究实践差距程度的争论客观化,并激发对解释和后果的进一步讨论。原创性/价值据作者所知,这是第一篇采用严格的机器学习方法来衡量会计文献中基于主题的研究实践差距的论文。此外,作者还为研究实践差距的程度和地区差异提供了理论依据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信