Lindquist and Smith

JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING RESEARCH
Volume TVenty-One
2009 • I • '
pp. 249-292 , I
Journal of Management Accounting

Research: Content and Citation
Analysis of the First 20 Years
Tim M. Lindquist
Gerald Smith
University of Northern Iowa
ABSTRACT: This article provides a content and citation analysis of 186 articles pub-
lished in the Journal of Management Accounting Research (JMAR) between 1989 and
2008. We first examine JMAR's national and international presence. Then an analysis
of JMAR is structured by a taxonomy used by Hesford et al. (2007) to classify the
articles into content, source disciplines, research methods, and contributors. Articles
and citations in JMAR are analyzed and the most-cited authors, articles, journals, and
books are presented. The extent to which JMAR authors are cited in leading non-
management accounting journals is also presented. Finally, authorships and editorial
contributions by international faculty are compiled and discussed.
INTRODUCTION
T
his marks the 20th year for the Journal of Management Accounting Research
{JMAR), which is published by the Management Accounting Section of the American
Accounting Association. At this juncture, it is important to examine the role JMAR
has played in the management accounting arena. Periodically evaluating the accomplish-
ments of a journal is an important contribution (Brown and Huefner 1994). Meyer and
Rigsby (2001) suggest that after a journal is established, an analysis of its content
and citations provides a useful basis for understanding the direction of the publication.
They propose that such an evaluation is critical in determining a journal's stature and its
contributions to tbe literature.
We examine the content, .source disciplines, research methods, and contributors to
JMAR during the 20-year period (1989 to 2008) and provide an analysis of its citations.
Additionally, we examine international contributions of JMAR's authors and editorial par-
ticipants. Finally, we compare this research to other management accounting reviews and
citation analyses.
Motivation for Study

Accounting researchers recognize the importance of reviewing the accomplishments of
accounting journals. The Journal of Accounting Research {JAR) was reviewed by Dyckman
and Zeff (1984), while Heck and Bremser (1986) examined sixty yeare of The Accounting
The authors thank Charles Davis, Joan Luft, Claire Smith, and Matthew Kelderman for their research assistance
on this manuscript. We also thank the participants of the American Accounling Association Annual Meeting in
Anaheim, California for their helpful comments, along with meaningful assistance from two anonymous reviewers
and Rick Young (editor).
249
250 Undquist and Smith
Review (TAR). Brown et al. (1987) analyzed Accounting. Organizations and Society (AOS),
and Smith and Krogstad (1984, 2003) compiled the accomplishments of Auditing: A Journal
of Practice & Theory. Meyer and Rigsby completed a content and citation analysis of
Behavioral Research in Accounting (BRIA) in 2001 while Mensah et al. (2004) examined
the impact of management accounting research in four journals published between 1986
and 2000. Most recently, Hesford et al. (2007) compiled a bibliographic review of man-
agement accounting research from 1981 to 2000 across ten journals, which is published in
the Handbook of Management Accounting Research (Volume 1).
Analysis of a journal's citations is recognized as an objective measure of the journal's
impact and influence (Brown and Huefner 1994). The procedure of analyzing citations is
regarded as less susceptible to perceptual bias and confines itself to a sample of known,
active, and successful peer-reviewed articles (Brown and Gardner 1985; Doyle et ai. 1996).
Citation analyses, however, are not without their critics. Croom (1970) notes that citations
often can be framed negatively, suggesting such work is cited neither for its correctness
nor for its value to the literature. May (1967) additionally suggests that research chosen
for citation often is influenced by the "halo effect" where certain authors or articles are
chosen more often because they are more popular and well known by researchers.
Previous Management Accounting Reviews

Shields (1997) reviewed 152 management accounting research articles published by
North Americans in seven journals (AOS, TAR, Contemporary Accounting Research (CAR),
Journal of Accounting and Economics (JAE), JAR, and JMAR) between 1990 and 1996.
His review found the main emphasis on management accounting research in these journals
focused more on short-term management controls (e.g., annual planning and control) and
less on articles dealing with long-term control (e.g., capital budgeting, investment decisions,
longer-term performance planning, measurement, or incentives). The second most popular
management accounting research area was cost accounting, followed by other cost man-
agement topics. The majority of the 152 articles reviewed by Shields (1997) were grounded
in one of three major social sciences (economics, n = 75; psychology, n = 12, and soci-
ology, n = 7). He further found analytical, survey, archival, and laboratory experiments to
be the most common research methods employed in these studies.
Mensah et a!. (2004) investigated the impact of management accounting research pub-
lished between 1986 and 2000 in four journals, AOS, JAE, JAR, and TAR to determine
whether management accounting research made a difference outside its own field. Findings
indicated this body of management accounting research was cited in nonaccounting journals
specializing in economics, operations research, psychology, sociology, organizational be-
havior, and strategic management. They suggested that management accounting research
based in economic theory did not make a greater contribution than like research based in
other disciplines. Finally, Mensah et al. (2004) found that the rate of citations of manage-
ment accounting papers published from 1996 to 2000 decreased in nonaccounting journals.
As mentioned earlier, Hesford et al. (2007) completed a comprehensive review of man-
agement accounting appearing in ten journals. (AOS, BRIA, CAR, JAE, Journal of Account-
ing Literature [JAL], JAR, JMAR, Management Accounting Research [MAR], Review of
Accounting Studies [RAS], and TAR) for the period 1981 to 2000. They found that 28
percent of articles in these ten journals during this period addressed management accounting
topics. They also noted an expansion in the number of management accounting articles in
the second decade, led in great part by AOS. Content-wise, 70 percent of the management
accounting articles focused on control, 20 percent on cost, and 10 percent on a range of
Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Content and Citation Analysis of the First 20 Years 251
other topics. Within control, the second decade witnessed the most significant change in
topics, from budgeting and organizational control to performance measurement and eval-
uation. The dominant research method in this period was that of conceptual frameworks.
Hesford et al. (2(K)7) note frameworks studies involve the development of new concepts
and perspectives. These frameworks studies provide fresh insight to existing management
accounting issues. Frameworks method studies were followed closely by analytical, survey,
and experimental methods in popularity. The period from 1991 to 2000 was characterized
by a decline in conceptual frameworks and experiments and an increase in archival, case,
and field research methods. Economics was the dominant source discipline theory in this
group of management accounting research (43 percent) followed by sociology (40 percent),
and psychology (15 percent). Theories based in psychology decreased in the second period
of analysis and shifted more toward economics and sociology.
METHOD
This paper categorizes the contents, source disciplines (theory), research methods, au-
thors, and editorial contributions involved in the first twenty years of JMAR. Hesford et
ai.'s (2007) taxonomy of management accounting is used to examine 186 main articles
published in JMAR from 1989 to 2008. Hesford et al.'s (2007) taxonomy is an adaptation
of that used by Shields (1997). Contributions with referenced citations are analyzed in this
research. Not included are panel presentations, tributes, and comments.
Because JMAR currently is not included in the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI),
WC manually created the following six databases in order to conduct the content and citation
analysis.
(1) Article Information: Contains author(s), year of publication, title, author affiliation
at time of publication, topic classification, theory employed, subject type, and re-
search method. Additional cross-tabulations are also compiled of classification by
method and subject by method. If a study employs archival data, the database
records whether that data is public or private.
(2) Citations for Each Article: Contains author(s), year of publication, title, type of
publication (journal, book, book chapter, working paper, etc.), and journal/book
title, for a total of 13,403 citations.
(3) Additional Author Information: Contains current school of affiliation and doctoral
granting institution.'
(4) Editorial Contributions: Contains intemationai editors, associate editors, and edi-
torial board members as identified by their school affiliation at time of journal
publication.
(5) JMAR Articles Cited in Eight Prominent Non-Management Accounting Journals.
(6) A Database of the Number of Management Accounting Research Publications in
Eight Prominent Non-Management Accounting Journals.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Findings are presented in six sections: (1) National and International Presence of
JMAR, (2) Article Content Analysis, (3) Research Methods, (4) Authors., (5) Citation Anal-
ysis, and (6) Multi-Cultural Impact.
The 2008 Hasselback Accounting Faculty Directory was used to determine current affiliation of authors. TTiree
authors were not listed in the directory nor could any information be found aboul them on the web.
Jourruil of Marmgement Accounting Research, 2009

252 ' Lindquist and Smith
National and International Presence of JMAR

Brown and Huefner (1994) conducted an opinion survey of 367 associate and full
professors of the "best 40 MBA programs" as noted in BusinessWeek's Guide to the Best
Business Schools. Five years after its inception. Brown and Huefner (1994) found JMAR
to rank 22nd of 44 journals for familiarity among all faculty queried. Among managerial
accounting faculty, JMAR ranked 8th of 44 journals. JMAR also ranked high in quality
(most prestigious journal) at 16th of 44 among all accounting faculty, and 7th of 44 among
managerial accounting academics.
Brinn and Pendlebury (1996) directed a questionnaire survey of 88 academics in tiie
U.K. to measure the quality of 49 accounting journals. Among all accounting faculty, JMAR
ranked 16th of 49 for journal familiarity and i 4th of 49 in quality. Ballas and Theoharakis
(2003) completed an opinion survey of 1,230 international accounting faculty partitioned
by geographic location: North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia/New Zealand. Inter-
estingly, while Ballas and Theoharakis (2003) suggested that a difference existed in per-
ception of journal quality across nationalities, JMAR ranked relatively the same in journal
quality among all international divisions of accounting faculty (either 13th or 14th of 40
journals). They suggested this strong international recognition oiJMAR'% quality was prob-
ably due to strong European interest in management accounting research and the fact that
a considerable proportion of Asian academics in this study obtained their highest degrees
in the U.S. Among management accounting researchers participating in this study, JMAR
ranked 4th of 40 journals in terms of quality.
Lowe and Locke (2005) used a web-based, interactive questionnaire to educe views of
149 academics from British accounting and finance departments on journal paradigm and
quality. A total of 32 journals were evaluated, however, participants only analyzed a subset
of the 32 journals with which they felt most knowledgeable and familiar. In this sample,
JMAR ranked 10th of 32 journals. Finally, Hesford et al. (2007) stated Ú\a\JMAR facilitated
an increase in management accounting research in their study period (1981 to 2000) with
the inclusion of another journal dedicated solely to that discipline.
Article Content Analysis

Table 1 (Panel A) presents the summary content analysis of 186 articles published in
JMAR in the Total Period (1989 to 2008). A total of 106 articles were published in the first
decade (Period 1: 1989 to 1998) with 80 articles published in the second decade (Period
2: 1999 to 2008).
Following Hesford et al. (2007) management accounting articles in JMAR were clas-
sified into three categories: Management Control, Cost Accounting, and Other Managerial.
One author of this paper, with research expertise in management accounting, completed the
classifications. Months after all classifications were made, the author reviewed his work.
The second round classifications yielded 98 percent agreement with the first. Where dis-
crepancies existed, the author consulted with other management accounting academics to
come to a consensus on proper classifications. Below are the categories and their
subcategories.
U) MANAGEMENT CONTROL
Performance measurement and evaluation - _
Performance measurement
Incentive systems
Consequences for organizational behavior and performance
Organizational control

r~ -!+ T* en fN ^
tN sq sq so 00
r^ ir! f^ rn —•
•^ tN (N
^ m m f^t •—'
Ia
1
(sj _ _
ON
OS
— oo oo oo
m rN —I —
WS
I
90
So CO oc oo oo oo
Os OsCTÔs Os
o o
— 00 — 00
•^ o Os m ZI t
(VJ fN) — • w
%
%
g^ ^ ^ ^ ^
»O Os ^- oo SD
oo Tf •^ -- p tN tN
tN -îT Ö O s en Os "C
rf (N rî tN —
OS m oo
ofN Os m —
1 a
oo 00 00 00 00 oo
o\ o Os o
Os £ Os o Os o
— <N o — (N -H fN
I I 1
Os
I
Os
.H b I I
OS
oo
Oí
Os u OO Os S U Os Os
OO CTs
^1 Os
— fN
Os
oc
Os
^"g
•C
-i
tsO
!
I H: 2 -g
U
w w w .g
O O n
•s-s -o
tN a.
o (U
•§"3 =
ë 1 •c -c •c "c
ß PU £ F a. ß
254 Lindquist and Smith
(31
<N <N <N (S CM
00
O <n O o o — (N — 5: - g
next
c
so m
ued
m m
00
m m S
ö Ö oo S oo m 00 V~l
(M
1
o m o o O —' iN ^
32)
32)
32)
32)
32)
32)
rs
m m m en
VI m — m — en t ^ '^ 0
^ ^ ^
\D m 00 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
Os — \C p- m r- 00 o O «n
f^ — rn oc ly^ W-) (S
1 o^ rn o^ —
(S
r-i
—
rs —
— en
a
o
CN IT) m —I « m — m r-
(S Im
pa
^
5155
m —
(N oo
5555555
m oo fs r- (N V^ vu 00 00 ^ lO
r~; — 00 (N
(N 00 iT) rn — — rn VI
<N 00 v¿ ^ — 00 00 — o^
r- —
t S (N I
m —
00 00
ON o
73 a\ o
I O
c^
C« O
u O
O
il ^ o 2— O
Ucc I i fa
si c 5
u ,O
eu E-
Í2 g ^ 1^
< CQ ^

| O^0O —
— — I "Ti
— o >i~i\v~i — — Or-JOr— —I
1 — Os m m en
"o
•a (N
1
(po
tal Peri
S 00 — o I "^
O
Cu
o
o.
'S >.
u
sto
Q — OrJI —
rce
•a -â
I VD
cd
C
(D
•a
o "¡5 S o
peril
to ê •S
o o -^ fc- CQ 2 £ 3 f
tL, Pi un O
U u 00
It r^ gS8o o 8 ON o t~- o
O OO
— o r- o
^ ^ ^ 0^ G^ 5^ ^ S^ ^ S^ ^ ^ ü^
_____ •^ \O O N ON O Ö ^ O 00 O O r*
**
'O
o ON (N 00 O O O ON VI OC O O P^ O
•o u O O O 00 —'
s w
tin
0.
B
1
114'
EU
îriod 1)
TABL
49%
54%
66%
89%
72%
77%
13%
00%
89%
89%
77%
13%
¡f: ^
POM
>n o
•^ 00 OO m '^ — «o — o —
m
Joumal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

O m
O r- g o o i n i n m o m o o
OintNt— (N>nr-inin
O 00 O r- —
t^ ïi^
&- S^ ^
I.V
QÏ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
<n Q O VI O Vi V) V¡ à a <n Vi
(N p tn
r- o <N <N r-i o o
^ »n tN O o o m —
I d r-^ - ^ O O — ^ O O O — o
N4 ^ ^^
«n o «n
r N
^
a.
5 2
CN p
Ö -^ Ö o o o o o o o
— d
I I o m O m o o o m
í i V¡ (N >nr^pr-;pu-ípr-;
rj — d r n d f N d r n
I O O
uu
258 ' Lindquist and Smith
Budgeting
Target setting
Participative budgeting
Budget-related dysfunctional behaviors
Capital budgeting relates to investment and resource allocation decisions as well
as opportunity, and relevant and sunk costs
International control investigates the impact of national culture
(2) COST ACCOUNTING
Cost allocation
Overhead
Joint Costs
Cost driver analysis
Activity-Based Costing (ABC)
Capacity costs
Other cost accounting topics
Cost variance
Cost information for decision-making
Cost practices
Emergence, development or decline of cost systems over time or in
specific places
Multiple cost
(3) OTHER MANAGERIAL
Accounting ¡nfonnation Systems {AIS)
Benchmarking
Just-In-Time (JIT)
Research methods
Strategic management looks at links between organizational strategy and manage-
ment control systems
Transfer pricing
Multiple other managerial
Table 1 illustrates that the most common topic in JMAR in the last 20 years was
Management Control with n = 98 out of 186 articles (52.68 percent). Figure 1 (Panel A)
shows that in the last two decades articles on Management Control increased from 40.57
percent in Period I to 68.75 percent in Period 2. Table I (Panel A) and Figure I (Panel B)
show that within Management Control, performance measurement, and evaluation included
the most articles (n = 42, 42.86 percent) increasing from 37.21 percent in Period I to
47.27 percent in Period 2. These control investigations include the study of various aspects
of performance measurement and incentive system design as well as consequences for
organizational behavior and performance. The area second most common within Manage-
ment Control was organization control (n = 24, 24.49 percent) which included all other
research in Management Control not otherwise classifiable into control-specific categories.
Organization control held relatively stable (25.58 percent in Period 1; 23.64 percent in
Period 2). Research on budgeting was also common within Management Control (n = 20,
20.41 percent) including target setting, participative budgeting, and budget-related dysfunc-
tional behaviors and increased between the two periods (16.28 percent in Period 1; 23.64
percent in Period 2). Last, Management Control research in JMAR focusing on capital

FIGURE 1
Control, Cast, and other Managerial Classifícations
Productivity between Decades (Period 1 versus Period 2) in JMAR
Panel Â: Classification by Period | .
Period 1
Period 2
Otlier Managerial
Panel B: Within Management Control by Period
47.27
.a so
5 37.21
S -•<> Z-'-'í^S 23,64 23.64 1 Perbd 1
A
16,28 16.28
•*. 2Ü I Perfod 2
o
3.63 4.65
ä 10 1.82
Í: O
^ Pert' Meas. & Eval. C>gan. Ctrl Butigeling Capital Budgeting an.
Management Control
Panel C: Witbin Cost Accounting by Period
« 90
w 76.92
- 80 70.96
I™
93
S 50 I Perbd I
I Perbd 2
23.08
16.13
S 2(1 9.68
u
u 10 3.23 0.00
^ 0
SI Allocation OtherCust ¡ Cosí Practices Multiple Cost
Cost Accounting
Panel D: Within Other Managerial hy Period

,, 33.33
I 30 25.00
< 2S
1 20 I Period 1
12.50 IPerßd2
9.37 8.33
3.13
O.W)
AIS Benchmarkirç JIT Research StragMp 'Irans. I'ric, Multrplc

Methods
UlheI Managerial
260 • I Lindquist and Smith
budgeting decreased frotn 16.28 percent (Period !) to 3.63 percent (Period 2) while inter-
national controls remained low for both periods (4.65 percent in Period 1; 1.82 percent in
Period 2).
Cost Accounting and Other Managerial were tied for second most common (n = 44,
23.66 percent). Figure 1 (Panel A) shows that Cost Accounting articles decreased from
29.24 percent in Period 1 to 16.25 percent in Period 2. Other Managerial also decreased
from 30.19 percent in Period 1 to 15.00 percent in Period 2. Table 1 (Panel A) and Figure
1 (Panels C and D) present changes by period for Cost Accounting and Other Managerial
topics respectively.
Article Content and Source Disciplines (Theory)

Following Hesford et al.'s (2007) model, we identify five source disciplines: Economics,
Psychology, Sociology, Production and Operations Management (POM), and History. When
articles employ multiple-source disciplines, only the primary source discipline of the re-
search is listed. Economics includes articles on agency theory, industrial organization, and
microeconomic theory. History includes articles that examine the emergence and develop-
ment of management accounting systems and practices at a specific time and place. POM
includes articles focusing on linear programming and process control in manufacturing
settings. Psychology includes social and cognitive psychology as well as organizational
behavior. Last, Sociology includes organizational theory with an emphasis on contingency
theory.
Table 1 (Pane! B) shows that the most popular source discipline of JMAR authors from
1989 to 2008 was Economics (n = 46), followed by POM (n - 39), Psychology (n - 23),
Sociology (n = 15) and History (n = 11). Fifty-two articles in JMAR employed no clear
source discipline. Table I (Panels C and D) illustrates that the source discipline experiencing
the greatest increase during Period 2 was Economics (17.92 percent in Period 1; 33.75
percent in Period 2). Sociology was the only other source discipline to experience an in-
crease (7.56 percent in Period 1; 8.75 percent in Period 2). The largest decrease came from
POM (31.13 percent in Period 1 ; 7.5 percent in Period 2), followed by History (9.43 percent
in Period 1; 1.25 percent in Period 2), and Psychology (15.09 percent in Period 1; 8.75
percent in Period 2). Additionally, articles with no clear source discipline increased from
18.87 percent in Period 1 to 40 percent in Period 2.
Research Methods
Figure 2 (Panel A) and Table 2 report summary data pertaining to the research methods
used in JMAR between 1989 and 2008. In congruence with Hesford et al. (2007), we divide
research methods into nine types: Analytical, Archival, Case, Experimental, Field Studies,
Conceptual Frameworks, Review, Survey, and Other (including simulations). Analytical
methods involve mathematical analysis including formal proofs, while Archival methods
analyze data in existing databases. Case studies investigate management accounting issues
within a single organization. Experimental methods, usually grounded in a source discipline,
entail human subjects completing a laboratory task. Field Studies consists of the investi-
gation of management accounting issues in two or more organizations. The Conceptual
Frameworks research method involves the development of new conceptual frameworks. It
combines multiple perspectives and information sources such as empirical facts, theoretical
or practical observations and prior literature (often in other disciplines) supplemented with
the authors' own synthesis and perspective (Hesford et al 2007). Review articles provide
reviews and syntheses of a prior literature. While Surveys are sometimes used in experi-
mental research, we treat Surveys as involving the collection of questionnaires completed

EIGURE 2
Research Methods Employed in JMAR
Panel A: Research Methods
15.58
Research Method
Panel B: Research Method by Period
"•^'* 21.25 ai.»
Analytical Archivai Case E^çemKûi Fietd rrameworis Review Survey Other
Research Method
outside the laboratory. Within Other, simulations consists of computerized modeling of

behavior to generate a researchable data set.
In the past 20 years, the predominant research method published in JMAR was Analytic
(n = 30; 16.13 percent) with most of those classified as Management Control (n = 14;
14.29 percent). The second most common research method was Survey (n = 29; 15.58
percent). The majority of surveys also took place within Management Control (n = 18;
18.37 percent). Tied for the third most published research method were Archival, Experi-
mental and Conceptual Frameworks (n = 27; 14.52 percent). Table 2 reports that most
Archival research occurred in Management Control (n = 22; 22.45 percent). Of the
27 Archival studies appearing in JMAR between 1989 and 2008, 22 percent have incorpor-
ated archival material available to the general public while 78 percent of studies have used
data which was private. There was no discernable difference in the use of public versus
private archival data across periods. Experimental research represented 14.52 percent (n
= 27) of research, with the majority classified as Management Control {n = 22; 22.45
percent). Finally, Conceptual Frameworks represented 14.52 percent (n = 27) of JMAR
articles and most often fell within Other Managerial (n = 15; 34.09 percent).
Figure 2 (Panel B) indicates the research method that experienced the greatest growth
from Period 1 to 2 was Archival (9.43 percent in Period 1; 21.25 percent in Period 2).
Figure 2 (Panel B) also discloses that other research methods showing noteworthy growth
in the past ten years include Analytical (11.32 percent in Period 1; 22.50 percent in Period
2) and Review (2.83 percent in Period 1; 8.75 percent in Period 2). Table 2 presents changes

32)
32)
32)
32)
32)
CN CN (N
m r'i m
m O r^ m (N m—
- S
(N
m
m fn fo rn m
5 5 • * - ^ • ^ ^ • *
(Nt— — — — r - O r - )
1
r ^ í N ' í i n — mr-ON—• ^ oooomc^, minooooo
cNOONCinoNintNOON v^ vO r*^ CN ro ^ i " ^ ^ NO ^D
(NONONCION'OOOSON
r^ ^ c^ ^ in ^ CN ON in fN -H -H
CN — — -H
t^^-rnO^-^CNOfim
O5 5
's oooooooooooooooooo rnmmmmf*"immm
Os ON ^ ON Î ^ ON ON ON O S
•^(NmrJ — omoofN C i t - w ^ ^r2,ocN —
ON m O m o inoomooinooQO"!
fN Tt — Tt CN ñS NOr-Jf<lu*)vûfNOONrn
T)-fN>nfN<NOr^.00(N 'fi" ^ es i n ^ NO O r*^ rN
— (N CN — —
—• fN " fN
" * CN m ( N CNI^-^ — ' C N t ^ O f N - -

— CN CN
Ô Ô ^D Ô ^ ^ ^D ^D ^D ^»O ^D \O NO Ô Ô Ô ^P NO ND
S oooooooooooooooooo
ooooooooo
o r- -^ r- — r- o
m fN — (M -H tN —.
cMOOinONmrôoin
3
rsmr^mrsr-ococ cNmmNomomoofN
inininînrninrn f i ^ ^ —^ ^ r^^ 00 ON r^
î r*^ * ^ Ô î" 1^1 iî i/*i -^ t^ ^ ^ ^ — r*-! ^ ^
— - ^ CM —•
or--'^r^rNt~-ooNO iNOO>nOf^rooo>n
mtN — (N — fN — (N — -H — — — — CN —
"S
c
o
t2
o :A d-rr C > C j= 3
Journal of Management Accounting Research. 2009

— (N o o — O I fN
m m m rn
o o ^ o —
ß vO f>
O
r^
(^
ON
^
o- oo
r-
00 o O r*^ r-
r- r~~
i n o o ——o — —
(1/55)
(12/55)
(15/55)
(4/55)
(0/55)
(3/55)
(3/55)
(6/55)
(11/55)
!
•3
o
S
ß m
00 fs tN o
^
in v-i
ON 00
tN
• ^
o o O
M —I
o o
[•-..
m
(N (N
Cd
r-1 >n o m \o
O O o o o o O o O
00 oo oo 00 00 00 00 00 oo
00 r^ tN tN —
Total •
^^
in
O fN O O o in "n
o o o (N
fN «o CN (/-) 00 \O
tN tN
* OO (N <N .n
• 3 — —
ß
J2
.i, 'C aj dj u.
ON
ON

across periods within research method. Figure 2 (Panel B) indicates the research method
with the greatest decrease in use during the second period was Conceptual Frameworks
{Period 1, 21.70 percent; Period 2, 5.00 percent). Another method showing a noteworthy
decrease includes Field Research (9.43 percent in Period 1; 2.50 percent in Period 2).
Subjects Used
In the past 20 years, JMAR has published a total of 56 articles employing human
subjects: 27 experimental and 29 surveys. Figure 3 (Panel A) illustrates the number, using
as subjects, nonaccountant professionals, accounting professionals, graduate students and
undergraduate students. It shows the most commonly used subjects in Experiments
were undergraduates (n = 18). Graduate students made up the second largest subject pop-
ulation for Experimental studies (n = 7). Surveys, on the other hand, were predominately
conducted with nonaccounting professionals including managers, supervisors and other non-
financial personnel (n = 15). Accounting professionals (n = 13) made up the second largest
subject population for surveys. Figure 3 (Panels B and C) shows the greatest increase in
the experimental use of subjects came from graduate students (13.33 percent in Period I;
41.67 percent in Period 2). Undergraduate students showed the greatest decrease in use
(73.33 percent in Period 1; 58.33 percent in Period 2). For Surveys, nonaccountant profes-
sional subject populations increased the most in JMAR (44.45 percent in Period 1; 63.63
percent in Period 2). Interestingly, use of accounting professionals decreased the most
(55.55 percent in Period I; 27.27 percent in Period 2). The use of graduate students also
increased for Surveys (0.00 percent in Period I; 9.10 percent in Period 2). The average
sample size for JMAR Experiments is n = 95.^ The average sample size of JMAR Surveys
is n = 255.3
Research Methods and Source Disciplines (Theory)

Table I (Panel B) also illustrates that the most popular research method within Eco-
nomic theory was Analytic (n = 17 studies). Additionally, Table 1 (Panels C and D) shows
the use of Economic theory in Analytical studies increased (6.60 percent in Period 1; 12.50
percent in Period 2). Table 1 (Panels C and D) reveals it was Archival research, however,
that showed the greatest growth in the use of Economic theory (0.00 percent in Period 1 ;
11.25 percent in Period 2). History was used most frequently within Conceptual Frame-
works (n = 7), but its use in Conceptual Frameworks is limited to Period 1. This probably
is due to a greater number of studies providing historical perspectives after the inception
of JMAR in 1989. POM theory is used most often in Case studies (n = 9), although such
use also declined (7.54 percent in Period I ; 1.25 percent in Period 2).
Theories based in Psychology were overwhelmingly more popular in Experimental
research (n = 14 of experimental studies). Such use showed a slight decrease (8.51 percent
in Period 1; 6.25 percent in Period 2). Finally, theories of Sociology were most common in
Survey research (n = 7 of survey studies). Sociology theory also showed slight increases
in Period 2 in Case, Experimental, and Other research methods.
Authors
Clearly, a journal cannot exist without the concerted and continued effort of its authors.
This section investigates the authors who had a significant impact on JMAR since its in-
ception in 1989. Table 3 lists authors (including co-authorship) who published at least three
- Sample size for experimenls published in JMAR range from 5 to 549 subjects with a median sample size of 75
subjects. The average sample size for Period 1 is n = 108 and for Period 2 it Is n = 80.
^ The average sample size for surveys in Period ! is n ^ 255 and for Period 2 it is n = 253.

FIGURE 3
Subject Types in JMAR Experiments and Surveys
Panel A: Subjects Types x Research Method (Experiments versus Surveys)
2U 18
Surveys
Graduate Students Undei^raduate Students
SubjcclType
Panel B: Subject TVpes for Experiments by Period

73.33
58.33
I Eîqîeriments Period 1
I Experiments Period 2
Subject Type
Panel C: Subject Types for Surveys by Period
63.63
55.55
• Surveys Period 1
27.27
• Surveys Period 2
9.10
0.00 0.00
V
w
s
Students
-o
su
-o
c
Subject Type

TABLE 3
Authors with at Least Three Articles in JMAR (1989-2008)
Author Name Total Authorships

Shields. M. 7
Young, S. M. 7
Balakrishnan. R. . • 5
Banker, R. 5
Foster, G. 4
Luft, J. 4
Selto. F. 4
Chow, C. 3
Demski. J. 3
Dhavale, D. 3
Evans, J, 3
Fellingham, J. 3
Gupta. M. 3
Hansen, S. 3
Jacobs, F. 3
Killough, L. 3
Libby, r. 3
Lillis, A. 3
Schroeder, D. 3
Wier. B. 3
articles in JMAR in the last 20 years. A total of 373 authors appeared in JMAR at least
once within the 186 articles analyzed from 1989 to 2008. Authors arc presented by total
authorship (ties are presented in alphabetical order). Tied for having the most publications
in JMAR arc Mike Shields and S. Mark Young, each with 7 articles. Ramji Balakrishnan
and Rajiv Banker tied with 5 articles each for the second most prolific authorships.
Current School Affiliation of JMAR Authors

Current school affiliations for JMAR authors are presented in Table 4 for schools with
at least four authorships. Meyer and Rigsby (2001) suggest current school affiliation is a
better indicator of current status of research as compared to authors' affiliation at the time
of publication. They propose academic institutions develop a tradition that encourages con-
tinued publication in particular journals. From 1989 to 2008, Michigan State University had
the most total authorships in JMAR (n = 13). followed by The Ohio State University (n
= 12), and the University of Southern California tied with the University of Washington
(n - 9).
School of Doctoral Degree of JMAR Authors

Contributions to JMAR also can be analyzed by examining the doctoral granting insti-
tution from which its authors obtained their degrees. Table 5 provides a list of schools that
graduated JMAR authors who published in the journal at least four times. The Ohio State

TABLE 4
Current School Affiliation of JMAR Authors
(minimum of four articles)
... Number of Number of Total Authorships

School of Afiiliation DilTerent Authors Different Articles for School"
Michigan State University 4 11 19
The Ohio State University 6 8 .12 ..
University of Southern California 3 7 9
University of Washington 6 7 9
Arizona State University 5 6 •i :
Stanford University 3 7 7
The University of Iowa 3 6 7
Temple University 2 6 6
University of Colorado 2 6 6
Indiana University 3 4 5
University of Houston 3 5 5
University of Melbourne 4 4 5
University of Pittsburgh 3 4 5
University of South Carolina 4 3 5
Auburn University 2 4 4
Dartmouth College 2 3 4
Rice University 3 4 4
Tilburg University 4 3 4
University of Florida 2 3 4
University of Kentucky 4 4 4
Manchester University 4 2 4
University New South Wales 3 3 4
University of Toledo 2 2 4
University of Toronto 3 3 4
University of Waterloo 3 4 4
University of Wisconsin 3 4 4
Virginia Tech University 2 4 4
' Schools are listed by total authorships. With ties, schools are presented in alphabetical order. Total authorships
is the number of authors of JMAR articles currently affiliated with the same school. As in Meyer and Rigsby
(2001), if two individuals affiliated with the same school. Ihis counts for two authorships for the affiliated
school.
University topped this list with 19 authorships, followed closely by the University of Pitts-
burgh (n = 17), Harvard University and Stanford University (n = 14), and then Carnegie
Mellon University (n = 12).
Schools whose faculty (Table 4) and doctoral alumni (Table 5) published in JMAR
likely have a strong management accounting doctoral program as well as an accomplished
current managerial faculty. Institutions appearing in both tables include, in alphabetical
order, Arizona State University. Indiana University, Manchester University, Stanford Uni-
versity, The Ohio State University, University of Colorado, University of Florida, The
University of Iowa, University of Melbourne, University of Pittsburgh, The University of
Washington, University of Waterloo, University of Wisconsin, and Virginia Tech University.

TABLE 5
School of Doctoral Degree of JMAR Authors
(minimum of four articles)
Number of Number of Total Authorships

School of Degree Authors Different Articles for Scbool»
The Ohio State University 14 13 • 13
University of Pittsburgh 5 14 17
Harvard University 8 14 14
Stanford University 8 - 1 2 14
Carnegie Mellon University 7 12 12
The Pennsylvania State University 6 Ç 9
University of Washington 5 8 8
The University of Iowa 5 7 7
Texas A&M University 5 6 7
The University of Texas 7 7 7
The University of Arizona 6 4 Ô
University of California, Berkeley 5 6 6
University of Colorado 5 4 6
Columbia University 2 6 6
University of Illinois 6 S 6
Indiana University 5 6 6
University of Kansas 3 6 6
University of Michigan 6 6 6
Northwestern University 4 6 ' * 6
University of Wisconsin 4 : 5 g
Arizona State University 5 5 5
University of Chicago 3 5 5
Cornell University 2 5 5
University of Florida 5 5 • 5
The University of Georgia 3 5 • ' 5
University of Missouri - 3 5 5
The University of Tennessee 4 5 ' 5
University of Waterloo 3 5 . 5
University of London 4 . 3 1 4
Maastricht University 4 1 3 * 4
Manchester University 4 4 4
University of Melbourne 2 3 4
University of Memphis 3 4 4
University of Minnesota 4 4 • ' 4
University of Mississippi 3 3 - ' 4
University of Pennsylvania 4 4 4
University of California, Los Angeles 3 4 • 4
Virginia Tech University 4 4 4
"Total authorships includes the number of authors of JMAR articles with earned doctoral degrees from the same
school. Schools are listed in alphabelical order by tolal authorships.

Citation Analysis
As mentioned above, analysis of a joumal's citations is an objective measure of its
impact and influence on the literature (Brown and Huefner 1994; Smith and Krogstad 1984;
Krogstad and Smith 2003). This study compiles a citation database of major articles ap-
pearing in JMAR with the above-mentioned exclusions. A total of 13,401 citations were
included in the database.
Authors Cited by JMAR 20 or More Times
Table 6 presents a list of the authors who were cited 20 limes or more in JMAR between
1989 and 2008. A total of 74 authors are included on this list. Robert Kaplan was cited
most (n = 301), followed by S. Mark Young (n = 129), Robin Cooper (n - 125), Rajiv
Banker (n = 123), Mike Shields (n = 120), and Dave Larcker (n = 106). It is interesting
to note that a number of behavioral researchers appear on the list whose main research
focus is not management accounting. This suggests many articles in the last 20 years of
JMAR were multi-disciplinary and were supported by theories in psychology, sociology,
and/or economics.
Journal Articles Cited by JMAR Five or More Times

Table 7 reports journal articles and authors cited five times or more in JMAR between
1989 and 2008. A total of 138 articles are included in this table which lists the number of
times the article was cited in JMAR, article title, journal where article was published, year
of publication, and author(.s). Articles tied for number of citations are presented in alpha-
betical order. The most cited journal article in JMAR over the past twenty years was Robert
Kaplan's, "Measuring Manufacturing Performance: A New Challenge for Managerial Ac-
counting Research" (n = 23). Jake Birnberg, Mike Shields, and S. Mark Young's "The
Case for Multiple Methods in Management Accounting Research" was the second most
cited journal article (n = 17). Tied for third was "Manufacturing Overhead Cost Driver
Analysis" by George Foster and Mahendra Gupta, and "Moral Hazard and Observability"
by Bengt Holmstrom (n = 16). It is interesting to note that one of the most widely cited
papers in JMAR relates to cost accounting (Foster and Gupta 1990) which accounted for
only about 24 percent of total publications. Not as surprising was that the other widely
cited articles relate to management controls, representing about 53 percent of total articles
in JMAR.
Journals Cited Most Often by JMAR

A ranking of the top 25 journals most often cited by JMAR between 1989 and 2008 is
presented in Table 8. In a count of total citations, the five most-cited journals in JMAR
were: Accounting, Organizations and Society (n = 1,013), The Accounting Review (n
= 887), Journal of Management Accounting Research (n = 638), Journal of Accounting
Research (n = 529), and Journal of Accounting and Economics (n = 340). Given the multi-
disciplinary nature of management accounting, it is not surprising that over half of the top
25 most-cited journals were not accounting journals but represented disciplines such as
management and administrative science, psychology, strategic management, organizational
behavior, finance, and economics.
Books and Book Chapters Cited Five or More Times in JMAR

A list of the most-cited books and book chapters in JMAR is presented in Table 9. A
minimum of five citations is required to be included in this table. The most-cited book in

TABLE 6
Authors Cited by JMAR 20 or More Times
Author
Kaplan. R. 301
Young, S. M. , • 129
Cooper, R. 125
Banker, R. 1^
Shields, M. 120
Larcker. D. 106
Ittner, C. 87
Merchant, K. 83
Brownel!, P. 78
Govindarajan, V. 71
Foster, G. 'm
Johnson, H. T. 68
Chow, C. 65
Demski, J. 65
Datar, S. . .
Baiman, S. 54
Gupta, M. $1
Anthony, R.
Norton, D.
iö
50
Milgrom, P.
Holmstrom. B.
m
46
Horngren. C. AS
Hopwood, A.
Simons, R. m
44
Balakrishnan, R. 43
Atkinson, A. '" 39
Potter, G. 39
Locke, E.
Waller, W.
n
Otiey, D. T.
m
37
Chenhall, R.
Evans, H. as
36
Murphy, K. 36
Feltham, G. ••^ é
Roberts, J, Ä5
Shank, J. .'j'
Lambert, R. 34
Zimmerman, J. 34
Hirst, M. 33
Covaleski, M.
Sivaramakrishnan. K. n
31
(continued on next page)

TABLE 6 (continued) ^-
Author . I
Fisher, J. . 30 -,
Selto, F. 30
Anderson. S. - ^^ i
Bimberg, J. ^ '"
Jensen, M. 29
Luft, J. 28
Noreen, E. 26 • ' "~
. Scapens, R. 26
Dirsmilh, M. 25
Gupta, A. 25
Hofstede, G. 25
Sunder, S. 2S
Abernethy. M. 24
Antle, R. 24
Latham, G. 24
Rajan, M. TA
Vollmann, T. 24 ^ •
Argyris. C. 23 -^
Srinivasan, D. 23
Bonner. S. 22 '
Campbell, D. 22 : '
Simon, H. 22
Anderson, E 21 '• ,
Bruns, W. 21
Innes, J. 21
Lukka, K. 21
,' . Sprinkle, G. 21
; , Gordon, L. 20
' Hambrick, D. 20 ,
Hamson, G. 20
'. - Hughes, J. 20 *
Porter. M. 20
Schroeder. R. 20
JMAR is Relevance Lost: The Rise and Fall of Management Accounting by H. Thomas
Johnson and Robert Kaplan (1987) (n = 28). Two books. Advanced Management Account-
ing by Anthony Atkinson and Robert Kaplan and Case Study Research: Design and Meth-
ods by Robert Yin, tie for the second most cited book in JMAR (n = 15).
JMAR Articles Cited by Eight Other Non-Management Accounting Journals

Another important area to evaluate when judging the impact of a journal on the aca-
demic community is the extent to which it has been cited in other leading journals outside
its specific discipline. To this end, we conducted an analysis of the citations of JMAR by

I
CO
B a:
Oí) ,
^^ o
t.. -' Q
^!*
_' ca c on "S
2 .s 2
upt
C U ;; —
O "o a. > p. s ai a
& O X CÛ
S.
«- .2
"1 " *
es 00 oo
oo
Os
o
a^ r Ov CO Ov 00 r-
O\
oo
Ov
^ Ov ON
lis ov ov
•^ a
il 60
a;
I -c
I
[A
a: a: -S O
eu OQ w
c c S u
• c •—
3 c JJ XI
u o
-o
o
i< 3
Où ii
C Ofl
•u g
Wî 3
ra
S E2 S
m r-i —
il
zu
'S
ex
o S Cíí a:
ri I-; ..a . bit w
3 îi
.o £
W-1 — —
ON o ON ON oo £C? oo oo
00
ON 5 ON ON
u 'S fNl — —
"a c
3 5l
CQ OS
S
a
1 6
o
s s Z •o
X!
u u
"í •o
•c Pä g § 1
td C •c
E, •a
c U 1
X
3
O o
c
o u P u
(D O I CQ
¿>
•o
rt
i •a
•c u
i I
u u « 5:
a
"H.
B UÛ
•o -g
111 Ü
OU
u .i .2 '*- rt Û- •o I 3^
I
o u. 00 tí 2 'Ô
u ri
2 25™ CÛ
•a
U
o —
i ' ij-
(D Ert C
COEr " rtu
C ^ 3 O
E5 a.
es S
CÜ
.2 o o
X
I
CQ
.s:
s
o '.S (N 00 00 j
r-
o-
ON
00 ON s; 00
ON
00 r-
ON
00
ON
ON
ON
s:
I
C
-C
•a
cl u
o o 'ë •g
the
•a u O '5. CL
(/)
CQ
•S 3
O
UJ
I CQ
&0
3 Si DO
c ^ E •a
c
o
3
3 o M
o CA
CQ S
ta
M O
u
'S
U
ä "o
.S U (J
00
•a ¿ri 2 0)
u
_ o
.e-xj
111 •f| s| c
•a
c
O
m
ou 4>
Ü
jj¿ yi
13 C
u •a
ou
S ^ > c u c -Tí C •=
c
rfoi
Q, in
CQ §§ U 3 «
os o 3
(U
- jc (J <_] i¿ c^ tO¿
r- r- VI %D
O\ ON 00 Ç\ OO ON 00
Os o^ Os O\ Os
g s: ^
S ^
u
I
o
u -S E
•â
•a
tu I
Q
U g OJJ o
s <! ÎO 13
*j U «
OU J=
E C Î;
S H
¿H 0«
c
iiî
•S M ^ 3:"
« C Cl- 2 S -,
Où u
3 -c
CL
c E
E5 H
o
II
1.1
Z
276 Undquist and Smith
S*
I
o c c
o o
c c
.ü; LÍ aj <L> -*-'
N UU
en 00
00 OO
ON ON
"2 .S
8 s
os
S
^
G
'a
gs
Q - 1
tu
O
U
o -£2
y c
a.
S
D.
a
<

!>¿
UJ
^1^ ai o
CQ C/5 >" p-, 2 c/: U
m M-l
m r- Ov 00 OV Ov ON o Ov
00 Ol Ov ov ON Ov Ov Ov
ov ON
0 0 22
II
0»
1
pil ^ oi
c
EQ _o
(0 '.3
c S3
g
ntu;
îctu
ofit
u os
S ai 00
•a
"cd •c 3
C
O DU
o
o ^ 'S 2 "§
™ Ul
'S o Ü
1
o
rvi
u îi, u
u o
O
T3
C
aj
u c -a 11 U
;£
M
"o
c o
M
P y Iû.
S U
tis
§ § c
u eu on O ^ Í3 o
c u -a
ca u
rpor;
stotr
dget
• ~ — . " ^
3 3
CQ o U Z O
U
ZU

I.
ci ce
I a: •
u
o' Q
(U
§1 ah 'Ö0
5b'—'
u
ill rt (0 u &i
arc
tne
inu
CO
CQ CQ CQ
o
Qd; a
oa 00 ^ ON O r~- OO rO
¡5 ON oo m
ON ON Ç^ OO O ON ON 00
ON ON ON ON O\ ON O Os ON CT- Sï
—. « (^ — _ _-
g» ^ ^
s '%
I s
^
a.
u 0
>• o
3
I I u
ô
u T3
CQ
o
P
u I
O
•o
u O
s _ u
P£ Q rt
u 1 u U
3
5 55 o
I I •s •s Cû ^ J
o
1 •f ^ "g; U
o I
•o
rt trQ riÑ 'a^ 3^
ai 00
T3
.„ -3 c p
H
o
o
u T3
00
B
•C
a
I CQ
c "O • - bù
u
00
o 2 o
CO
u rt >^ 5 .2 n £ 0 n E
U.3 -a CO S u
se ^ . 2 Î
— O
3 3
rt iî5 I Ü ä ^ ri
Srt
S-5 DO.y
a. o 3
< « U
eu ^ 1
>ë 'a D.
t c u OJ f— u
o C- cG XI
H
vO -o "O
ZU

oa
o
«il
a. u.
• D—aj .2< é
< o I-* 1 ë.g I I ¡vi-s^ s§ i l i Ö'B'-S°= i;ix: £
1 CQÜ 2 Ü CQ¿
ON CN
^r fS
00
ON
ON
ON
ON 00 oo ON
ON
ON ô
00
ON ON
Os ON
ON
O\ Ov ON ON
s
•s o ^
ig i
Sí 5
1 03
U
o •5b
sa
c
aË C/5 ë
CQ 3 .2 13
O
a. •S
3
a. O
c E U O"
00 o a: W 13
U -3 00 §
bO
•O
3
a. o
I e c
o i2 a
> s 00 a
O
.s e s . 2
CQ
^-1
O
-J u
:
O
CQ •3 o c¿
o aj _j
•a
M
00
•c
•S I
00 P
B B £ S a o
'Ë
KJ
ç B
X u
CQ U> .|
ao .2
5 .Ë
m < B 3
"2 tM
3 o Sí OÛ Ë
Ë B
ttj ox) u ÎJ ' u ^
is § 3 U 00 k. oo ap rtt f-s
u- u w CQ OD' c •a 3 ^ 3 3 c4 UJ
< < < 3 pa CQ CQ u u
CQ

«- .2
00 m li-i ^
ON Os CTs Os oo tw oo 00 Ov oo
Os ON ON s; 8ï ON OS ON Os O> Os
a; 8
'S
9
O G 2
•a Q
c s
o
•a
u
u
CQ
g Q
's <
13 C 'S
3 U
CÛ E
U
ma
c
C
oa. •a
Oí 3
13 E oil
ta ai
_4J B c5
• > »
•§§
n .5 O -^
a tu '•?? c
U
CL I uÎ 13
n a
o .S"
rsh
0)
•r: X
2 u o
c:
T3
ra 0
tu
ë
X -J
tel
S
zu
o CO
Id
•C È >. aJ :=! Ë
~ eu 2 - -Ë
J3 .ïï r- aJ .- — ^ -s
mi UÛ eau cû Q
u ^
«-.2
ONO m o o o f M o o r i
ON ooos CTvoooor— o o o
ONON O N O S O N O N O N O
*—1 f—1 ï^H îH i-H i-H ^.H Ç^
^ 9
eu
05 0=
S
•a
9
I
td
CQ
00
c
•a
o
U
u ¿J a
•T3
c
o o .
u u^
.M >^ s
U
1.^
zu
.s
CÛ
<u ^ o
y i o' (3 o -=:
mua:: Z UÛ
o 00
ON
s;
13
s c
CA
"M ¡r"
-£3 ^
ion
tie
£
H N
•Si •a
•y .E 3 ::-2
£?
O
.S
¿2
tin
o
lg c ir.
's "^
I o ëîj ZU
1.^
ZU
Content and Citation Analysis of the First 20 Years ' . 283
TABLE 8
Journals Cited Most Often by JMAR
1989-2008
Journal Total Citations Rank

Accounting . Organizations and Society 1,013 1
The Accounting Review 887 2
Journal of Management Accounting Research 638 3
Journal of Accounting Research 529 4
Journal of Accounting and Economics 340 5
Management Accounting 265 6
Harvard Business Review 254 7
Management Science 212 8
Administrative Science Quarterly 190 9
Academy of Management Journal 169 10
Journal of Cost Management 158 u
Journal of Applied Psychology 134 12
Management Accounting Research 123 13
Academy of Management Review 112 14
Contemporary Accounting Research 109 15
Strategic Management Journal 108 16
Journal of Accounting Literature 101 17
Organizational Behavior and Human Peffonnance 86 18
Journal of Finance 79 19
Journal of Financial Economics 76 20
Econometrica 73 21
Psychological Bulletin 73 22
Accounting Horizons 71 23
American Economic Review 64 24
The Bell Journal of Economics 46 25
leading non-management accounting and management journals.'^ We chose Accounting, Or-

ganizations and Society (AOS), The Accounting Review (TAR), Journal of Accounting Re-
search (JAR), Contemporary Accounting Research (CAR), Journal of Accounting and Ec-
onomics (JAE), Decision Sciences (DS), Academy of Management Journal (AMI), and
Strategic Management Journal (SMI), because they are considered to be leading journals
in the fields of accounting and management. Their citations are available in the Social
Science Citation Index (SSCI). These journals also are among the most cited in JMAR.
Table 10 reports the number of times that JMAR was cited in these eight journals from
1989 to 2008. It took four years for JMÁR articles to be referenced in this literature, with
the first two references appearing in the behaviorally based U.K. journal AOS. Since its
inception in 1989, JMAR articles have been cited in these leading academic journals a total
of 216 times. AOS (n = 106) and TAR (n = 47) authors cited JMAR the most since 1989.
The level of citation increased about 550 percent for AOS since 1998 and 740 percent for
A citation analysi.s of leading psychology journals including Psych Bulletin and Journal of Applied Psychology
found no references to JMAJi articles.

CE:
1
•a
o
et tí o
z
< ^
c
'is
a ll .^
Cl- c
aj
ap
U slû C - I I — O N ' O - ^ C I . fNNOirjCl.(NQ.OO ONÎS r-. -H o

00 T ! a ON 0 0 o o ON ON a w^r~-ooa^'c;oo r~-ON
ON — - ^: - OON
N O O^
^ O N OON
N OON
N — O N O N O ' - S O N - ^ O N ONON
H
t
o
S
o
T3
'S, 00
o
o
ca Ul
B<£
2 "S
a iD
cO 3
— .Ü o-
? sc
B pu u
00 1/1 ap
3 y «
»
O
E i' a o.
ONONONONOOOO 0000
zu

Í u
00
(/J •H
u
u Û
S'T. Iu t/3
N 00 •o .
O CQ I
CO
X -J CO
o;
:
ci
k, 1
tski
ren
Ë ^^ a s« 9 Ü c
o
¡- G S O
Pa .Í2 ttJ
(J Q x: l n
O
<Ü<5
.3
Û
«-.2
o s ^ o o t a. 0 0 m r- ^ Q ^
so oo ON ON in ON 00
OS ON ON ON — Os OS ^
S= 3 x: 3 OSONOS 3 ON
Ov
Os
ON
"C
ON
-*" 9
fi.
aa
VD ^ <n>nin »o in "nin
1.^
ZU
TABLE 10
JMAR Articles Cited by Eight oiher Non-Management Accounting Journals"
1989-2008
Number of JMAR Articles Cited by:

Year AOS TAR JAR CAR JAE DS AMJ SMJ Total
1989 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1991 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1992 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
1993 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
1994 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 4
1995 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 4
1996 1 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
1997 5 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 7
1998 2 0 1 0 1 0 I 0 5
1999 10 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 12
2000 10 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 15
2001 4 4 2 0 3 2 0 0 15
2002 10 3 2 2 0 0 0 1 18
2003 8 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 15
2004 8 6 0 4 0 0 0 0 18
2005 10 7 0 4 1 1 0 0 23
2006 8 5 1 0 0 0 1 0 15
2007 7 3 1 10 {) 1 1 0 23
2008 17 6 4 5 1 0 1 1 35
Total 106 47 18 25 9 5 4 2 216
M O S {Accounting, Organizations and Society); TAR (The AccountiniÍ Review): JAR (Jountat of Accounting
Research); CAR (Contemporary .Accounting Research): JAE (Journal of Accounting atid Economics): DS
{Decision Sciences): AMJ lAcademy of Management Journal); SMJ {Strategic Management Joumai).
TAR. It is important to note that in recent years JMAR articles have been cited in leading
management journals such as Decision Sciences and the Academy of Management Journal.
Publications of Management Accounting in Eight Other Leading Non-Management

Accounting Journals
An additionai point of interest is the extent to which any management accounting
research is published in other leading non-manage ment accounting journals. To that end.
Table 11 presents the number of total articles and the percent that are managerial in nature
published in the Journal of Accounting Literature (JAL), Accounting Organizations and
Society (AOS), Review of Accounting Studies (RAS), Contemporary Accounting Research
(CAR), the Journal of Accounting and Economics (JAE), Behavioral Research in Accounting
(BRIA), the Journal of Accounting Research (JAR), and The Accounting Review (TAR)
between 1989 and 2008.^ AOS led the group with 30 percent of its publications focused on
The 2008 edition of the Journal of Accounting Uterature {JAL) had not published at the time of this research
study.

II
- U^ -
es
C
3
O
oou-imov —
OC
.9
c
o
u
03
oor~-r— Ov — o i r - f N O o o r - — (N —
B
G
C 5
O
Z
0«
( N < N t N ( N — • m m — —
«
— v o o O f N O r s t N — u-jcNr-ior— —
1—1 • -
CÛ o
<3
to
in ov
on
B
e
si
0£
e
sS
— O —
2I
O O — O O — — O — O O O
II
•0 3
c —
3-5:
Ovo — CNcoTTinvor-ooov
OCOvOÔÔv^2'^^S'Ov
Os Ov Ov Ov Ov Ov Ov Ov Ov ON OV

288 . -, Lindquist and Smith
management accounting issues, followed by BRIA (27 percent). Management accounting

research was also published in the other journals, but to a much lesser extent.
MuIti-Cultural Impact
International Authorship
Implications of differences in national culture on the effectiveness of management ac-
counting procedures and controls is recognized in academic accounting research (Chow et
al. 2001; Salter and Sharp 2001; Williams and Seaman 2001; Brody et al. 2006; Wong-on-
Wing and Lui 2007; Noravesh et al. 2007). The literature finds that what works effectively
in one country as a management control may not work effectively in another. JMAR is a
U.S.-based publication but its audience is international. Thus, contributions of its authors
and editors are amplified when more culturally diverse paradigms and perspectives are
employed. The input of varied cultural perspectives allows a journal to present new tech-
niques and conceptual frameworks of thought.
Table 12 presents the international authorships in JMAR by national region: Canada
(CA), European Union (EU), Asia (A), Africa (AF), Australia/New Zealand (A/NZ), and
Israel (IS). As mentioned earlier, total authorships counted the number of times an individ-
ual author published in JMAR (including co-authorships). Table 12 shows the greatest num-
ber of international authorships came from the European Union, whether based on current
affiliation (n = 41) or doctoral granting institution (n = 41). There appears to be no clear
trend regarding international authorships, although Period 2 had more international involve-
ment than Period 1. There were spikes in international authorship, notably 1998 (44.40
percent) and more recently 2006 (62.50 percent), and 2008 (40.00 percent).
Finally, an analysis of the article content of international authors found no substantive
difference from the content of total JMAR authors. Research on Management Controls
seemed to represent a majority of international journal articles, with an equal distribution
of the remainder between Cost Accounting and Other Managerial.
International Editorial Contributions

Table 13 presents the international composition of JMAR's editorial contributions by
the above-mentioned national regions. Editorial contributions included efforts of the Editor,
Associate Editors, and members of the Editorial Board from 1989 to 2008. Ad hoc reviewers
were not included in this count. The European Union again had the most editorial contrib-
utors (n ^ 71), followed by Canada (n = 47), Australia/New Zealand (n = 30), and Asia
(n = 12). This data found a clear trend of increased international editorial contributors
across periods. In Period 1, only 13.40 percent of editorial contributions were international.
In Period 2, that rose to 25.50 percent. In Period 1, editorial contributions from Canadians
were most frequent at 33.90 percent and fell slightly to 28.16 percent in Period 2. Con-
tributors from the European Union were the most involved in Period 2 at 56.32 percent of
total international contributions, which was up from 22.00 percent in Period I. Represen-
tatives from Asia declined from 20.34 percent in Period I to no involvement in Period 2.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The Journal of Management Accounting Research has been a medium for academic
management accounting research for 20 years. This research presents content and citation
analysis of 186 articles published in JMAR over this time period. It also discusses trends
in the international contributions of authors and editors of JMAR in the last 20 years.
Shields (1997) and Hesford et al. (2007) found, as did we, that Economic theory was
dominant in management accounting theory. Ail three studies also documented that other

m—.icnrfo — oor-moo <nw)OOoom

CN-^CNCNCOCN —.(N —
^ j o o o o o o o o o o o o o o —
— O O O O O O O ^ C N - r r — C N O C N O r s l O O TT I ON
1 O O O O O O O C — O O O — O O O O O O O I r J
z • < | O O m O O O O O O O O O O O O
— CNt^cNvicN • ^ I —'
O O m O O — O — O O C N O O O O O - H i r i | " < t
M ^ QO
- «5 O
tú M n
CQ £ s
•n o
ON ON
m O
oo O
in
ON
O $î
ON \C
m r-n in r- o r-
CN
•*
m o mrs
O ON
o n tN tN
m
¿ e^ m
— • *
H o^
5 CN (N —'
s
s ° — O O O O C O O O O O O O I - *
p .2
E I N
— O O m i r -
1 -
o
'S s:
O O O O O O O O ^ O O O O O O O O O O O I —
e «
— O - ^ O O O O O — O — C J O O O — O O O —
P rN O —
tú
O N Q — cNm-rfw-ivor-ooON
OOONONONONOVONONONONON
O O O O O O O O O O O

290 . ' Lindquist and Smith
TABLE 13
International Composition of the Editorial Contributions to JMAR by National Region
1989-2008
European Australia Total Percent

Canada Union Asia New Zealand Contributions International
1989 1 1 1 0 m 9.1%
1990 I 1 1 0 34 8.8%
1991 2 3 2 2 47 19.2%
1992 2 3 2 2 4? 19.2%
1993 2 3 2 2 48 18.8%
1994 2 2 2 2 50 16.0%
1995 2 0 0 2 46 8.7%
1996 2 0 0 2 47 8.5%
1997 2 0 1 1 44 9.1%
1998 2 0 1 1 44 9.1%
1999 4 7 0 0 44 25.0%
2000 4 8 0 0 44 27.3%
2001 5 8 0 0 41 31.7%
2002 2 5 0 2 42 21.4%
2003 2 5 0 2 43 20.9%
2004 2 5 0 2 43 20.9%
2005 2 4 0 2 38 21.1%
2006 3 5 0 2 39 25.7%
2007 3 5 0 3 40 27.5%
2008 2 6 0 3 30 36.7%
Total 47 71 12 30 844 18.96%
social science theories often are implemented in management accounting research, namely
Psychology and Sociology. This concurs with Mensah et al.'s (2004) conclusion that eco-
nomics need not be the dominant underlying source discipline for all management account-
ing research. Hesford et al. (2007) also investigated the impact management accounting
research had on non-management accounting journals. They found tJiat among journals that
were not devoted primarily to management accounting. AOS published the most manage-
ment accounting research. This study finds the same to be true. Finally, Mensah et al.
(2004) found a decrease in the rate of citations of management accounting research in
accounting and nonaccounting disciplines. This study found, however, an increase in the
percent of citations in non-management accounting journals, of articles published in JMAR.
Shields (1997) predicted that future management accounting research might come from
various sources. He felt management accounting research might continue along a traditional
route and extend previous work. We found this to be true for research published in JMAR
in the 12 years since his study. As mentioned, much research has focused on management
controls, especially involving principal-agent approaches to performance measurement. He
also thought new theories and research might unfold in management accounting research.
However, we did not find that to be the case for the majority of work published in JMAR.
Economic theory continued to dominate published research and the use of Psychology
theories decreased in the last ten years. Especially discouraging was the growth of unsup-
ported research not grounded in any source discipline. Shields (1997) also believed issues

Content and Citation Analysis of the First 20 Years
important to practice would direct research in management accounting, which to some

extent, we ñnd to be true. Research including benchmarking, JIT, and strategic management
all increased in the last ten years driven by interest in U.S. manufacturing.
This research was limited by the accuracy of one of the author's classification of articles
inlo the taxonomy of management accounting research used in the study. It was also limited
by that author's identification of source discipline used in the articles. While the purpose
of this research is to provide a content and citation analysis of past research, it also may
influence future research. JMAR could potentially benefit, as Shields (1997) called for 12
years ago. by employing new theories pulled from the social sciences. More case and field
research studies also would likely increase its influence on practice and also increase its
audience. We believe JMAR should continue to embrace the steps it has taken to increase
its international authorships and editorial contributions. Charting the next 20 years of JMAR
will be a challenging and exciting task.
REFERENCES
Bailas, A., and V. Theoharakis. 2003. Exploring diversity in accounting through faculty journal per-
ceptions. Contemporary Accountinfi Research 20: 619-644.
Brinn, M.. and M. Pendlebury. 1996. U.K. accountanls' perceptions of research joumal quality.
Accounting and Busitiess Research 26: 265-278.
Brody, R., L. Suming, and S. Sailer. 2(K)6. Merit pay, responsibilily, and national values: A U.S.-
Taiwan comparison. Journal of International Accounting Research 5: 63-79.
Brown, L.. and J. Gardner. 1985. Applying citation analysis to evaluate the research contributions of
accounting faculty and doctoral programs. Accounting Review 60: 262-278.
, , and M. Vasarhelyi. 1987. An analysis of the research conUibutions of accounting,
organizations and society, 1976-1984. Accounting. Organizations and Society 12 (2): 193-204.
and R. Huefner. 1994. The familiarity with and perceived quality of accounting journals:
Views of senior accounting faculty in leading U.S. MBA programs. Contemporary Accounting
Research: 223-250.
Chow, C , T. Lindquist, and A. Wu. 2001. National culture and the implementation of high stretch
performance standards: An exploratory study. Behavioral Research in Accounting 13: 85-96.
Crooni. D. 1970. Dangers in the use of the science citation index. Nature (London) 227: 1173.
Doyle, J., A. Arthurs, L. Mcaulay. and P, Osborne. 1996. Citation as effortful voting: A reply to Jones,
Brinn, and Pendlebury. Omega 24: 603-606.
Dyckman, T., and S. Zeff. 1984. Two decades of the Journal of Accounting Research. Journal of
Accounting Research 22: 225-297.
Foster, G., and M. Gupta. 1990. Manufacturing overhead cost driver analysis. Joumal of Accounting
and Economics 12: 309-337.
Heck. J., and W. Bremser. 1986. Six decades of The Accounting Review: A summary of authors and
institutional contributors. The Accounting Review 61: 735-743.
Hesford, J., S. Lee, W. Van der Stede, and S. M. Young. 2007. In Handbook of Management
Accounting Reseanh. edited by C. Chapman, A. Hopwood, and M. Shields, Chap. 1, pp. 3 -
26. Burlington. MA: Elsevier Publishing
Johnson, H., and R. Kaplan. 1987. Relevance Lost: The Rise and Fall of Management Accounting.
Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Krogstad, J., and G. Smith. 2003. Assessing the influence of "Auditing: A journal of practice &
theory: 1985-2000." Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory: 195-204.
Lowe, V., and J. Locke. 2005. Perceptions of joumal quality and research paradigm: Results of a
web-based survey of British accounting academics. Accounting, Organizations and Society 30:
81-98.
May, K. 1967. Abuses of citation indexing. Science: 890.

292 , Lindquist and Smith
Mensah, Y., N. Hwang, and D. Wu. 2004. Does managerial accounting research contribute to related
disciplines? An examination using citation analysis. Journal of Management Accounting Re-
search 16: 163-82.
Meyer, M., and J. Rigsby. 2001. A descriptive analysis of the content and contributors of behavioral
research in accounting 1989-1998. Behavioral Research in Accounting !3: 253-278.
Noravesh, I., Z. Dilami, and M. Bazaz. 2007. The impact of culture on accounting: Does Gray's
model apply to Iran? Review of Accounting and Finance 6: 254-272.
Salter, S., and D. Sharp. 2001. Agency effects and escalation of commitment: Do small national
culture differences matter? The International Journal of Accounting 36: 3 3 ^ 5 .
Shields, M. 1997. Research in management accounting by North Americans in the 1990s. Journal of
Management Accounting Research 9; 3-61.
Smith, G., and J. Krogstad. 1984. Impact of sources and authors on Auditing: A Journal of Practice
& TheoryÂ citation analysis. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 4: 107-117.
Williams, J., and A. Seaman. 2001. Predicting change in management accounting systems: National
culture and industry effects. Accounting, Organizations and Society 26: 443-460.
Wong-on-Wing, B., and G. Lui. 2007. Culture, implicit theories, and the attribution of morality.
Behavioral Research in Accounting 19: 231-246.

Copyright of Journal of Management Accounting Research is the property of American Accounting Association
and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright
holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

Lindquist and Smith

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lindquist and Smith

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING RESEARCH

Journal of Management Accounting

Motivation for Study

Previous Management Accounting Reviews

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Jourruil of Marmgement Accounting Research, 2009

National and International Presence of JMAR

Article Content Analysis

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Joumal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Panel B: Within Management Control by Period

Panel D: Within Other Managerial hy Period

AIS Benchmarkirç JIT Research StragMp 'Irans. I'ric, Multrplc

Article Content and Source Disciplines (Theory)

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Panel B: Research Method by Period

"•^'* 21.25 ai.»

Analytical Archivai Case E^çemKûi Fietd rrameworis Review Survey Other

outside the laboratory. Within Other, simulations consists of computerized modeling of

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

" * CN m ( N CNI^-^ — ' C N t ^ O f N - -

Journal of Management Accounting Research. 2009

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Research Methods and Source Disciplines (Theory)

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Graduate Students Undei^raduate Students

Panel B: Subject TVpes for Experiments by Period

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Author Name Total Authorships

Current School Affiliation of JMAR Authors

School of Doctoral Degree of JMAR Authors

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

... Number of Number of Total Authorships

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Number of Number of Total Authorships

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Journal Articles Cited by JMAR Five or More Times

Journals Cited Most Often by JMAR

Books and Book Chapters Cited Five or More Times in JMAR

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

JMAR Articles Cited by Eight Other Non-Management Accounting Journals

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Joumal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

CQ C/5 >" p-, 2 c/: U

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Journal Total Citations Rank

leading non-management accounting and management journals.'^ We chose Accounting, Or-

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

o (— C Q > C - I I — O N ' O - ^ C I . fNNOirjCl.(NQ.OO ONÎS r-. -H o

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Number of JMAR Articles Cited by:

Publications of Management Accounting in Eight Other Leading Non-Management

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

Journal of Management Accounting Research, 2009

management accounting issues, followed by BRIA (27 percent). Management accounting

International Editorial Contributions

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS