Editorial Policy and Style Information

Sponsored by the Accounting, Behavior and Organizations Section of the American Accounting Association, Behavioral Research in Accounting publishes original research about how accounting (broadly conceived) affects and is affected by individuals, organizations, and society. The primary audience is the international community of behavioral, organizational, and social researchers in accounting. Behavioral Research in Accounting seeks original empirical research (e.g., field, survey, experimental, experimental economics) in all areas of accounting. The journal also seeks to be the venue of choice for literature reviews of underlying discipline theories; methodological and methods papers; and scale validation papers that are relevant to the journal's scope and to its readers. Behavioral Research in Accounting also encourages replications of influential behavioral articles in order to build a robust base of knowledge about the behavioral, organizational, and social aspects of accounting. The international set of editors and reviewers collectively have expertise in all the domains that the journal seeks to influence, and promises prompt and fair reviews by subject matter experts.For a manuscript to be acceptable for publication, the research question should be of interest to the intended readership, the research project should be well designed and well executed, and arguments or findings should be presented effectively and efficiently.The following guidelines should be followed for submitting manuscripts: New manuscripts are submitted using the Manuscript Submission and Peer Review System, at https://www.editorialmanager.com/bria. Revisions with a manuscript number less than BRIA-2019-500 are resubmitted at http://bria.allentrack.net. Both sites contain detailed instructions regarding the preparation of files for submission. To ensure anonymous review, the title page is to be submitted as a separate file from the manuscript text.Manuscripts under consideration by another journal or other publisher should not be submitted. The submitting author will be asked to verify this during the web-based submission process.For manuscripts that report on field surveys or experiments: Please ensure that reporting descriptive statistics, models, and tests of hypotheses is complete. For experimental papers, this would generally include: (1) reporting standard deviation and cell sizes in any tables of means; (2) including degrees of freedom along with any reported test statistics that have degrees of freedom, whether in the tables, footnotes, or text; and (3) ensuring ANOVA, MANOVA, ANCOVA, etc. tables are complete, including all estimated terms, including the error term, along with the associated degrees of freedom. Note that if test statistics and associated degrees of freedom are reported in the tables, then authors need not repeat this material in the text. For example, authors could provide only the p-values for effects (tests) of interest in the text, if desired. If the additional documentation (e.g., questionnaire, case, interview schedule) is sent as a separate file, then all information that might identify the author(s) must be deleted from the instrument.Manuscripts that report experiments utilizing human subjects must verify approval by the institution at which the experiment took place. Notation of approval should be made within the manuscript. In addition, the submitting author will be asked to verify approval during the web-based submission process.Authors are responsible for recognizing and disclosing any conflict of interest that could be perceived to bias their work. Conflict of interest disclosures include, but are not limited to, grants or research funding, employment, affiliations, honoraria, stock options/ownership, royalties, consultancies, inventions, and patents. Authors will be asked to provide any potential conflicts of interest during manuscript submission.The nonrefundable submission fee is $100.00 payable by credit card (VISA, MasterCard, or American Express only). The payment form is available online at: http://aaahq.org/AAA-Journals/BRIA/Payment. If you are unable to pay by credit card or have any questions, please contact the AAA Member Services Team at (941) 921-7747 or info@aaahq.org.Revisions should be submitted within 12 months from the request, otherwise they will be considered new submissions.The review process consists of the following: The editor reviews the submitted manuscript for proper format and consistency with the mission of the journal. The author(s) is notified if the manuscript is deemed inappropriate for further consideration.Manuscripts that pass the initial review are sent to an associate editor and a minimum of two reviewers for formal review.The editor evaluates comments and recommendations of the reviewers and the associate editor and informs the author(s) of the decision regarding the publication of the manuscript (reject, accept, or revise/resubmit). The editor's decision and comments, without identifying information, are forwarded to the associate editor and reviewers.Requested revisions are returned to the same reviewers. In addition to the revised manuscript, the author(s) should submit responses to the reviewer comments that restate the comments and identify how and where the comment is addressed in the revision.The process will continue as described above until a final publication decision is made.Consistent with our Publications Ethics policy on plagiarism (for the full version, please see: http://aaahq.org/Portals/0/documents/about/Policies&ProceduresManual/PlagiarismPolicy.pdf), all articles are automatically processed through CrossCheck prior to publication to identify text taken from published and unpublished works, print or digital, that is not properly cited or quoted.The review, as outlined above, is an overview of the actual process. The editor may, in some circumstances, vary this process at his or her discretion. Through its constructive and responsive editorial procedures, the journal aims to render research efforts relevant and rewarding for all concerned.

Editorial Policy and Style Information

Editorial Policy

JATA manuscript preparation guidelines follow closely those used in The Accounting Review, another American Accounting Association publication. These guidelines follow the general format of the Chicago Manual of Style (15th ed.; University of Chicago Press). Another helpful guide to usage and style is the Elements of Style, by William Strunk, Jr., and E. B. White (Macmillan). Spelling follows Webster's International Dictionary.A paragraph indent, bold, lower case, fourth level heading. Text starts …An abstract of not more than 150 words should be on a separate page immediately preceding the text. The abstract should be nonmathematical and include a readable summary of the research question, methodology, and principal findings and contributions. The style should be objective, without personal pronouns. The title, but not the author's name or other identification designations should appear on the abstract page and on the first page of the text.The author should note the following general requirements:Mathematical notation should be employed only where its rigor and precision are necessary, and in such circumstances authors should explain in the narrative format the principal operations performed. Notation should be avoided in footnotes. Unusual symbols, particularly if handwritten, should be identified in the margin when they appear. Displayed material should clearly indicate the alignment, superscripts, and subscripts. Equations should be numbered in parentheses flush with the right-hand margin.Citations: Work cited should use the “author-date system” keyed to a list of works in the reference list (see below). Authors should include the relevant page numbers in the cited works.I.R.C. § 1248(a) Treas. Reg. § 1.1248–3(a)(4) Rev. Rul. 82-1, 1982-1 CB 417 Rev. Proc. 82-1, 1982-1 CB 751 LTR 8208047 (11/26/80)43 TC 1654 (1975) TC Memo 1943–496 (1943) 370 F. Supp. 69 (DC-Tx., 1974) 656 F. 2d 659 (CT. Cl., 1981) 411 F. 2d 1275 (CA-6, 1975) 388 U.S. 1492 (1980)Every manuscript must include a “References” section that contains only those works cited within the text. Each entry should contain all information necessary for unambiguous identification of the published work. Use the following formats (which follow The Chicago Manual of Style):Footnotes are not to be used for documentation. Textual footnotes should be used only for extensions and useful excursions of information that if included in the body of the text might disrupt its continuity. Footnotes should be inserted using the “footnote” or “endnote” feature of the word processing software, which will automatically number the footnotes throughout the manuscript with superscript Arabic numerals.The object of JATA is to promote the wide dissemination of the results of research and other scholarly inquiries into the field of taxation. Permission is hereby granted to reproduce any of the contents of this journal for use in courses of instruction, as long as the source and American Accounting Association copyright are indicated in any such reproductions. Written application must be made to the American Accounting Association for permission to reproduce any of the contents for use in other than courses of instruction, such as inclusion in books of readings or in other publications intended for general distribution. In consideration for the grant of permission in such instances, the applicant must notify the author(s) in writing of the intended use to be made of each reproduction. Except where otherwise noted on the first page of each article, the copyright interest has been transferred to the American Accounting Association. Where the copyright has not been transferred to the Association, applicants must seek permission to reproduce (for all purposes) directly from the author(s).The AAA Executive Committee's policy (originally adopted in 1989, and amended in 2009) is that the objective of the Association-wide journals (The Accounting Review, Accounting Horizons, Issues in Accounting Education) is to provide the widest possible dissemination of knowledge based on systematic scholarly inquiries into accounting as a field of professional research and educational activity. To fulfill this objective, authors are encouraged to make their data available for use by others in extending or replicating results reported in their articles.

EDITORIAL POLICY AND STYLE INFORMATION

Anthony Hopwood (e.g., 1983) has long observed that we have had few field studies that have examined accounting in the contexts in which it operates. Indeed, in his 2006 plenary address as the American Accounting Association's Presidential Scholar, Hopwood concluded that accounting research has become "increasingly detached from the practice of the craft … [as well as] too cautious and conservative, too rigid and traditional, and insufficiently attuned to grapple with the new, and to embrace novel insights and bodies of knowledge" (Hopwood 2007, 1365, 1370). In part, he urged that more innovative field research be conducted, informed by theories derived from sociology and employing qualitative, naturalistic research methods (e.g., Hopwood 2007, 1372). This special forum of Behavioral Research in Accounting is devoted to publishing original papers detailing field studies of accounting in their natural organizational and institutional contexts which have drawn on sociological perspectives and employed qualitative methods.Webster's dictionary defines sociology as "the science of society, social institutions, and social relationships: the systematic study of the development, structure, and function of human groups conceived as processes of interaction or as organized patterns of collective behavior." As such, a sociological perspective of accounting as a form of structure focuses on examining the multiple roles accounting plays in the social constitution of organizations and institutions, or on the social constitution of accounting, rather than the orthodox view that accounting faithfully represents an objective, economic reality. On this theme, for example, Fombrun (1986; see also Van de Ven and Poole 1996; Dirsmith 1998) reasoned that such forms of structure as accounting may simultaneously serve as: technological solutions to the instrumental problems of production; political exchanges among contending organizational and institutional factions; and social interpretations within the organization and by its external, institutional constituents. Thus, accounting may simultaneously be seen as: technical solutions to the problems of fostering production rationality—the more traditional, orthodox province of accounting, and as political advocacy devices for representing the positions of various constituent groups within the organizational/institutional milieu, and as a means of fostering social discourse with a wider society. The papers that were submitted to this special forum of BRIA did indeed tend to examine facets of accounting that went beyond the orthodox perspective.The first of four articles appearing in this special forum, Anna Alon and Peggy Dwyer's "Globalization and Multinational Auditing: The Case of GAZPROM and PWC in Russia," is directed at probing auditor-client relationships for a huge gas company, as well as the social expectations of the audit function in the transitional economy of Russia. Based upon a qualitative analysis of publicly available international and local Russian-language media accounts of three controversial episodes, the authors find that the expectations of audit practice expressed in the two forms of outlet were systematically different. They also find that not only do international and audit firm standards of practice influence the conduct of an audit in such a context, but also that local contingencies in the form of the traditional Russian notion of blat, which involves a reliance on personal networks and contacts, apparently impacted the manner in which the audit was conducted. The authors offer an intriguing set of interpretations and implications for future research.The second article, Janne Chung and Carolyn Windsor's "Empowerment through Knowledge of Accounting and Related Disciplines: Participatory Action Research in an African Village," sought to undertake a participatory action research, grassroots intervention to inform villagers within a small village in Kenya of accounting principles and internal control procedures by leveraging off the villagers' own traditional Christian values and culture. Departing from an orthodox perspective, the authors invoked the concept of orthopraxis to achieve social and economic justice through practices of accounting, thereby serving the interests of the villagers by empowering them to better evaluate the motives, desirability, and achievements of social programs designed to ease poverty. The authors conclude with a challenge to future scholars to join them in the field with the goal of empowering the poor—where the harvest is plenty, the harvesters are few.The third article by Drew Sellers, Tim Fogarty, and Larry Parker, entitled "Unleashing the Technical Core: Institutional Theory and the Aftermath of Arthur Andersen," used the template of institutional theory to explore the impact of organizational de-legitimation on Arthur Andersen employees. This paper worked in a relatively unexplored area of institutional theory; that is, many organizations that have been successful in obtaining the support of their critical constituencies have often been documented. In contrast, this paper focuses on an instance of an entity that had become so toxic that permission to go forward could no longer be marshaled. The results of this study suggest an unusually high degree of entrepreneurial activity is unleashed once the confining legitimacy of the organizational structure is dissolved. It also shows that the value of social capital possessed by Andersen professionals changed in character and possibly increased in value. This process of deinstitutionalization that has been documented in this study has been recognized as a new direction for institutional theory, thus this paper offers contributions to institutional theory and the practice of modern accounting.The fourth article, Steven Thornburg and Robin Roberts' "'Incorporating' American Colonialism: Accounting and the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act," examined how the corporate form of organization and corporate accounting were used by the United States government to rationalize decisions, exercise control, and exploit Alaskan resources to benefit corporate America and the existing United States. The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (ANCSA) established Alaska Native Corporations, whose stock was distributed to qualifying Alaskan Natives in exchange for their agreement to extinguish all aboriginal land claims. Guided by prior work in accounting and postmodern colonialism, this paper identifies ways in which ANCSA, though lauded by the U.S. government as an innovative and generous settlement, perpetuated a historical pattern of indigenous exploitation by western economic interests, and employed corporate accounting policies and techniques to further the interests of the U.S. government and large corporations at the expense of Native Alaskans.Combined, the four papers appearing in this special forum of BRIA suggest that field studies of accounting drawing upon sociological perspectives and employing qualitative methods may be applied to a wide variety of social/organizational/institutional contexts and engender insights not offered by the more orthodox accounting venues.We heartily thank BRIA Editor Theresa Libby for creating the opportunity for this special forum, and the many scholars who devoted significant time and effort to supporting its mission in terms of providing insightful reviews:We should note that we received several additional papers that have considerable potential for making a useful contribution to the literature, but were ultimately rejected for publication in this special forum. We believe that these papers were in the early phase of the production cycle and will gain publication success with further development; in all such cases, the reviewers provided excellent guidance to aid in this development, suggesting that the benefits of this special forum of BRIA will hopefully extend well beyond the papers that appear in Volume 24, Issue 1. We urge the authors of these papers to persevere.

Behavioral accounting research: Pathologies, paradigms and prescriptions

This paper discusses about the development of behavioral accounting and how it influenced the research in behavioral accounting. Several interest fields in behavioral accounting research are discussed to provide an over­view of current behavioral accounting research opportunities. The research methodology and several difficulties inherent in those researches presented in this paper. The behavioral accounting research in Indonesia will discussed in the last of this paper.

This paper argues that a flexible approach should be adopted in the application of mixed methods research in behavioural accounting research by conducting it within the pragmatic paradigm, especially when a paradigm is defined as shared beliefs among members of a speciality area. By doing this, behavioural accounting researchers are not restricted by ontological and epistemological issues when deciding on how to address a variety of different research questions.

A “literature review” is an original work that summarizes and synthesizes prior research on a particular topic. As a result of the growth in the breadth, depth and complexity of the literature in Behavioural Accounting Research (BAR), there is significant potential for literature reviews to advance scholarship by synthesizing and connecting prior research within our discipline. In this chapter, we discuss specific rationales for writing a literature review in BAR, as well as the process of researching and preparing a literature review, including challenges scholars may face during that process. In particular, we provide guidance on conceptualizing an insightful structure, determining appropriate search boundaries and critically assessing and drawing conclusions based on common and discrepant findings. The goal of this chapter is to provide scholars with a guide, as well as examples of literature reviews in BAR, that may assist them in writing an effective literature review in their area of interest.

The American Accounting Association has reported a lack of vitality in accounting research. This paper proposes to reform doctoral education for accounting and all other disciplines such that the question the researcher asks is the primary consideration and the research methodology chosen is subordinate, but appropriate, for the question asked. Research methodologies, methods, and techniques should adjust to the question asked rather than adjusting the question asked to any particular research methodology, method, or technique.

American Accounting Association and its predecessor organization, The American Association of University Instructors in Accounting, have had as a primary objective the encouragement and promotion of research in accounting. On December 28, 1935, the regular business meeting of the twentieth annual convention of the American Association of University Instructors in Accounting was adjourned and the assembled members immediately reconvened in a business meeting and the members were shifted from the old organization to the new. The only changes that had been effected were the change of name and the adoption of a new set of By-Laws. The chief activities of the new Association were listed in the By-Laws as "publications and research." The first of the stated objectives of the Association was phrased thus: "To encourage and sponsor research in accounting and to publish or aid in the publication of the results of research."The means by which the American Accounting Association expected to encourage intensive research on accounting subjects was never fully faced. The Executive Committee did suggest a substantial, but very general, list of topics on which it was felt study was needed. It is quite evident that the master's and doctoral programs in accounting were looked upon as a source of research talent and effort which was readily available in quantity.

Reconstructing “behavioural accounting”

Behavioral Implications of Management Accounting Practices: A Contemporary Issue in Management Accounting

This essay is based on my American Accounting Association (AAA) Presidential Scholar Lecture delivered at the 2025 AAA Annual Meeting in Chicago. In this essay, I assert that theory-based scientific research is the best way to solve the practical—and existential—problems that threaten the accounting profession. I provide an example based on my own research into auditors’ judgments about complex estimates. I further argue that, although academic researchers and accounting practitioners share goals regarding the success and legitimacy of the accounting profession, their roles and responsibilities differ. I encourage accounting researchers to address the big problems facing the profession through independent development of generalizable knowledge, and I ask practitioners to support the research endeavor.