IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/aelcon/v15y2025i1p123-139n1005.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Another Way Forward: Comments on Ohlson’s Critique of Empirical Accounting Research

Author

Listed:
  • Breuer Matthias

    (Columbia University, 665 W 130th St, New York, NY 10027, USA)

Abstract

Ohlson (2025. Empirical accounting seminars: Elephants in the room. Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium 15, 1–8) laments that the evidentiary quality of empirical accounting research is low due to inappropriate methods and practices, leaving seminar attendees and readers unpersuaded by presented or published articles. He suggests that the norms of the profession prevent a public recognition and discussion of those issues, thereby sustaining the poor state of empirical accounting research. I agree that some current empirical approaches and norms seem to hamper progress toward more convincing research. I provide a practical suggestion to possibly improve the state of empirical accounting research. I caution though that even with better methods and more honest research practices, we should not expect that any individual research article can provide conclusive answers to important accounting questions. Such progress in knowledge requires a body of high-quality and independent research.

Suggested Citation

  • Breuer Matthias, 2025. "Another Way Forward: Comments on Ohlson’s Critique of Empirical Accounting Research," Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, De Gruyter, vol. 15(1), pages 123-139.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:aelcon:v:15:y:2025:i:1:p:123-139:n:1005
    DOI: 10.1515/ael-2022-0093
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/ael-2022-0093
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/ael-2022-0093?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    accounting research; Bayesian inference; hypothesis development;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M4 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting

    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:bpj:aelcon:v:15:y:2025:i:1:p:123-139:n:1005. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    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.