IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aud/audfin/v15y2017i148p595.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Accounting research in Romania: state of affairs, possible causes and deviations

Author

Listed:
  • Ionela-Corina Chersan

    (Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Ia?i)

Abstract

The paper aims to analyze the state of the accounting research in Romania, as compared to the other countries in Eastern Europe, as well as to identify the causes of the observed situation and its possible deviations in the research activity, respectively in the field of research evaluation. The Scimago database was used to carry out the research, which allowed the analysis of Romania's position in Eastern Europe in terms of the number of published articles, average number of article quotes and self-citations. The study of the specialized literature and the direct knowledge of some aspects specific to the Romanian academic life allowed to identify possible causes of the current situation, and also some behaviors, not always normal, generated by the enforcement of certain criteria for the occupation of didactic functions without a sufficient analysis of the Romanian realities, and even without any care to restore the traditional social role of the universities.

Suggested Citation

  • Ionela-Corina Chersan, 2017. "Accounting research in Romania: state of affairs, possible causes and deviations," The Audit Financiar journal, Chamber of Financial Auditors of Romania, vol. 15(148), pages 595-595.
    • Handle: RePEc:aud:audfin:v:15:y:2017:i:148:p:595
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://revista.cafr.ro/temp/Article_9553.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Judit Bar-Ilan, 2008. "Which h-index? — A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(2), pages 257-271, February.
    2. Norris, Michael & Oppenheim, Charles, 2007. "Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for coverage of the social sciences’ literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 161-169.
    3. Éric Archambault & David Campbell & Yves Gingras & Vincent Larivière, 2009. "Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the Web of Science and Scopus," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(7), pages 1320-1326, July.
    4. Alan Sangster, 2015. "You Cannot Judge a Book by Its Cover: The Problems with Journal Rankings," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 175-186, June.
    5. Guerrero-Bote, Vicente P. & Moya-Anegón, Félix, 2012. "A further step forward in measuring journals’ scientific prestige: The SJR2 indicator," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 674-688.
    6. Diana Hicks & Paul Wouters & Ludo Waltman & Sarah de Rijcke & Ismael Rafols, 2015. "Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics," Nature, Nature, vol. 520(7548), pages 429-431, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. L. Grigoroi & N. Muntean, 2018. "The Experience of the Republic of Moldova in Reforming the Accounting System and Its Harmonization with Ifrs and European Directives," Вестник Киевского национального университета имени Тараса Шевченко. Экономика., Socionet;Киевский национальный университет имени Тараса Шевченко, vol. 6(201), pages 59-64.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    2. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.
    3. Bryce, Cormac & Dowling, Michael & Lucey, Brian, 2020. "The journal quality perception gap," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    4. Saïd Echchakoui, 2020. "Why and how to merge Scopus and Web of Science during bibliometric analysis: the case of sales force literature from 1912 to 2019," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(3), pages 165-184, September.
    5. Rafols, Ismael & Ciarli, Tommaso & Chavarro, Diego, 2015. "Under-reporting research relevant to local needs in the global south. Database biases in the representation of knowledge on rice," SocArXiv 3kf9d_v1, Center for Open Science.
    6. Tang, Li & Yang, Defang & Wang, Mingxing & Guo, Ying, 2024. "The mediating impact of citation scope: Evidence from China's ESI publications," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3).
    7. Saïd Echchakoui, 0. "Why and how to merge Scopus and Web of Science during bibliometric analysis: the case of sales force literature from 1912 to 2019," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    8. Benedetto Lepori & Aldo Geuna & Antonietta Mira, 2019. "Scientific output scales with resources. A comparison of US and European universities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-18, October.
    9. Рубинштейн Александр Яковлевич, "undated". "Ранжирование Российских Экономических Журналов: Научный Метод Или «Игра В Цыфирь»? [Ran Ranking of Russian Economic Journals: The Scientific Method or “Numbers Game”?]," Working papers a:pru175:ye:2016:1, Institute of Economics.
    10. Schmal, W. Benedikt & Haucap, Justus & Knoke, Leon, 2023. "The role of gender and coauthors in academic publication behavior," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(10).
    11. García-Pérez, Miguel A., 2011. "Strange attractors in the Web of Science database," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 214-218.
    12. Massimo Franceschet, 2010. "A comparison of bibliometric indicators for computer science scholars and journals on Web of Science and Google Scholar," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(1), pages 243-258, April.
    13. Halevi, Gali & Moed, Henk & Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2017. "Suitability of Google Scholar as a source of scientific information and as a source of data for scientific evaluation—Review of the Literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 823-834.
    14. Alberto Martín-Martín & Enrique Orduna-Malea & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2018. "Coverage of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: a multidisciplinary comparison," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 2175-2188, September.
    15. Elizabeth S. Vieira & José A. N. F. Gomes, 2009. "A comparison of Scopus and Web of Science for a typical university," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(2), pages 587-600, November.
    16. Miguel-Angel Vera-Baceta & Michael Thelwall & Kayvan Kousha, 2019. "Web of Science and Scopus language coverage," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1803-1813, December.
    17. López-Illescas, Carmen & de Moya-Anegón, Félix & Moed, Henk F., 2008. "Coverage and citation impact of oncological journals in the Web of Science and Scopus," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 304-316.
    18. Ana Teresa Santos & Sandro Mendonça, 2022. "Do papers (really) match journals’ “aims and scope”? A computational assessment of innovation studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7449-7470, December.
    19. Shakeel ul Rehman & Rafia Gulzar & Wajeeha Aslam, 2022. "Developing the Integrated Marketing Communication (IMC) through Social Media (SM): The Modern Marketing Communication Approach," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, May.
    20. Hu, Guangyuan & Ni, Rong & Tang, Li, 2022. "Do international nonstop flights foster influential research? Evidence from Sino-US scientific collaboration," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    research evaluation; bibliometric; citations analysis; Scopus; Scimago;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M14 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Corporate Culture; Diversity; Social Responsibility
    • M21 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Economics - - - Business Economics
    • M40 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aud:audfin:v:15:y:2017:i:148:p:595. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Dumitru Valentin Florentin (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://revista.cafr.ro/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.