IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijcrac/v5y2013i4p359-391.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An evaluation of research authorship by gender in major academic and professional accounting journals

Author

Listed:
  • L. Murphy Smith
  • Paul A. Ashcroft
  • Katherine Taken Smith

Abstract

The role of gender is an important issue in the accounting field, both in practice and in higher education. This study provides a longitudinal analysis of female authorship of articles published in six major accounting journals, three academic journals and three professional journals: The Accounting Review, Contemporary Accounting Research, Journal of Accounting Research, The CPA Journal, the Journal of Accountancy, and Strategic Finance. Articles are classified into 11 different research categories and comparisons of authorship by gender are made across these categories. Results reveal that female academicians are making a significantly greater contribution to accounting research than in the past, both in academic and professional journals, reflecting their increasing representation and acceptance among accounting academics. This study makes a unique contribution by its analysis regarding the factors of gender, research topic area, and practice versus academic journals. The study extends prior gender publication research by examining how female researchers' performance has changed relative to that of males over time.

Suggested Citation

  • L. Murphy Smith & Paul A. Ashcroft & Katherine Taken Smith, 2013. "An evaluation of research authorship by gender in major academic and professional accounting journals," International Journal of Critical Accounting, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(4), pages 359-391.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijcrac:v:5:y:2013:i:4:p:359-391
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=56786
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    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:ids:ijcrac:v:5:y:2013:i:4:p:359-391. 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=328 .

    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.