Una aproximación crítica a la evaluación de la calidad de la investigación en contabilidad en el sistema universitario español y a sus implicaciones

A critical approach to the evaluation of the quality of accounting research in the Spanish university system and its implications

Autores/as

DOI: https://doi.org/10.6018/rcsar.439921
Palabras clave: Investigación contable, investigación crítica, acreditación ANECA, España

Resumen

Este trabajo analiza la conveniencia y consecuencias de los criterios de evaluación de la actividad investigadora en contabilidad establecidos por ANECA, concretándonos en los criterios para la acreditación de catedrático de universidad, así como el patrón y posibilidades de publicación de los académicos contables en España, Europa y a nivel mundial. Encontramos que los académicos del área contable tienen unas dificultades para publicar que son substancialmente superiores a las de los académicos de otras áreas de empresa. La mayor parte de los académicos afiliados a instituciones españolas que consiguen publicar en las principales revistas académicas contables recurren a co-autorías, principalmente estadounidenses y británicas, y a focalizar el contenido de sus trabajos en contextos y problemáticas no españolas. La normativa española de acreditación acentúa este comportamiento. Esta situación puede tener graves implicaciones para la supervivencia del área de conocimiento, el tratamiento de las temáticas y problemáticas específicamente ligadas al contexto español.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Citas

Aarssen, L. W., Tregenza, T., Budden, A. E., Lortie, C. J., Koricheva, J., & Leimu, R. (2008). Bang for Your Buck: Rejection Rates and Impact Factors in Ecological Journals. The Open Ecology Journal, 1(1), 14-19. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874213000801010014

Adair, R. K. (1982). A physics editor comment on Peters and Ceci's peer-review study. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 196. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1971

Agencia Nacional de Evaluación de la Calidad y Acreditación (2017). Informe periódico de ANECA para la acreditación en los Cuerpos Docentes Universitarios . Difusión de resultados. http://www.aneca.es/Documentos-y-publicaciones/Informes-de-resultados

Agencia Nacional de Evaluación de la Calidad y Acreditación (2019a). Informe periódico de ANECA para la acreditación en los Cuerpos Docentes Universitarios . Difusión de resultados. http://www.aneca.es/Documentos-y-publicaciones/Informes-de-resultados

Agencia Nacional de Evaluación de la Calidad y Acreditación (2019b). Méritos evaluables para la acreditación nacional para el acceso a los cuerpos docentes universitarios. http://www.aneca.es/Programas-de-evaluacion/Evaluacion-de-profesorado/ACADEMIA/Criterios-Diciembre-2019

Albu, C. N., Albu, N., & Alexander, D. (2014). When global accounting standards meet the local context-Insights from an emerging economy. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 25(6), 489-510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2013.03.005

Altbach, P. (2015). The Imperial Tongue: English as the Dominating Academic Language. International Higher Education, 49, 2-4. https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2007.49.7986

Argilés-Bosch, J. M., & Garcia-Blandon, J. (2010). Accounting Research: a Critical View of the Present Situation and Prospects. Spanish Acounting Review- Revista de Contabilidad, 14, 9-34. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/S1138-4891(11)70026-7

Arnold, P. J. (2009). Global financial crisis: The challenge to accounting research. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(6-7), 803-809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2009.04.004

Arquero, J. L., Jiménez Cardoso, S. M., & Laffarga Briones, J. (2016). Utilidad percibida de la producción académica-contable. Opinión de los profesores universitarios y de los profesionales. Revista de Contabilidad-Spanish Accounting Review, 19(2), 239-251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcsar.2015.10.004

Arquero, J. L., Jiménez Cardoso, S. M., & Laffarga Briones, J. (2017). Patrones de investigación en contabilidad de los profesores con éxito académico. Revista Española de Financiacion y Contabilidad, 46(3), 327-368. https://doi.org/10.1080/02102412.2017.1287462

Baker, C. R., & Bettner, M. S. (1997). Interpretive and critical research in accounting: A commentary on its absence from mainstream accounting research. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 8(4), 293-310. https://doi.org/10.1006/cpac.1996.0116

Ballas, A., & Theoharakis, V. (2003). Exploring Diversity in Accounting through Faculty. Contemporary Accounting Research, 20(4), 619-644. https://doi.org/10.1506/MLWH-KBTM-ET47-LYKH

Banal-Estañol, A., Macho-Stadler, I., & Pérez-Castrillo, D. (2019). Les étapes du financement de la recherche académique : de la soumission en partenariat jusqu'à l'attribution et aux publications. Revue Économique, 70(5), 625-653. https://doi.org/10.3917/reco.705.0625

Bedeian, A. G. (2003). The Manuscript Review Process: The Proper Roles of Authors, Referees, and Editors". Journal of Management Inquiry, 12(4), 331-338. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492603259056

Bengtsson, E. (2011). Repoliticalization of accounting standard setting-The IASB, the EU and the global financial crisis. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 22(6), 567-580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2011.04.001

Buchheit, S., Collins, D., & Reitenga, A. (2002). A cross-discipline comparison of top-tier academic journal publication rates: 1997-1999. Journal of Accounting Education, 20(2), 123-130. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0748-5751(02)00003-9

Chan, K. C., Chen, C. R., & Cheng, L. T. W. (2006). A ranking of accounting research output in the European region. Accounting and Business Research, 36(1), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2006.9730003

Cole, S., Cole, J. R., & Simon, G. A. (1981). Chance and Consensus in Peer Review. Science, 214, 881-886.

Dillard, J. F., & Tinker, T. (1996). Commodifying business and accounting education: The implications of accreditation. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 7(1), 215-225. https://doi.org/10.1006/cpac.1996.0027

Dillard, J., & Vinnari, E. (2017). A case study of critique: Critical perspectives on critical accounting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 43, 88-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2016.09.004

Escobar Pérez, B., García Meca, E., & Larrán Jorge, M. (2014). Factores que influyen sobre la producción científica en Contabilidad en España: la opinión de los profesores universitarios de Contabilidad (II parte). Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 37(2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2014.2.1087

European Academy of Management. (2014). Euram 2014 Waves and winds of strategic leadership for sustainable competitiveness. http://repository.supsi.ch/5726/1/e-book-euram2014.pdf

European Accounting Association. (2017). 40th European Accounting Association Annual Congress 2017. 10-12 May 2017 Valencia Programme & collected papers. http://eaa2017.eaacongress.org/userfiles/EAA Programme 2017.pdf

Evans, L. (2018). Language, translation and accounting: towards a critical research agenda. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 31(7), 1844-1873. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2017-3055

Fogarty, T. J., & Markarian, G. (2007). An Empirical Assessment of the Rise and Fall of Accounting as an Academic Discipline. Issues in Accounting Education, 22(2), 137-161. https://doi.org/10.2308/iace.2007.22.2.137

Fogarty, T. J., & Zimmerman, A. (2019). Few are called, fewer are chosen: Elite reproduction in U.S. academic accounting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 60, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2018.09.001

Gans, J. S., & Shepherd, G. B. (1994). How Are the Mighty Fallen: Rejected Classic Articles by Leading Economists. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(1), 165-179. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2138157

Gendron, Y., & Rodrigue, M. (2019). On the centrality of peripheral research and the dangers of tight boundary gatekeeping. Critical Perspectives on Accounting. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2019.02.003

Gildenhuys, P. (2020). Lotteries make science fairer. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 0(0), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2020.1812485

Gillies, D. (2014). Selecting applications for funding: why random choice is better than peer review. RT. A Journal on Research Policy and Evaluation, 2(1), 64-71. https://doi.org/10.13130/2282-5398/3834

Gray, R. (2010). A re-evaluation of social, environmental and sustainability accounting: An exploration of an emerging trans-disciplinary field? Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 1(1), 11-32. https://doi.org/10.1108/20408021011059205

Humphrey, C., & Gendron, Y. (2015). What is going on? The sustainability of accounting academia. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 26, 47-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2014.09.008

Hussain, S., Liu, L. Y. J., & Miller, A. D. (2020). Accounting as a dichotomised discipline: An analysis of the source materials used in the construction of accounting articles. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 66(102086), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2019.04.007

Inglis, M., & Mejia-Ramos, J. P. (2009). The Effect of Authority on the Persuasiveness of Mathematical Arguments. Cognition and Instruction, 27(1), 25-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000802584513

Jones, M. J., & Roberts, R. (2005). International publishing patterns: An investigation of leading UK and US accounting and finance journals. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 32(5-6), 1107-1140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0306-686X.2005.00624.x

Kamla, R., & Komori, N. (2018). Diagnosing the translation gap: The politics of translation and the hidden contradiction in interdisciplinary accounting research. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 31(7), 1874-1903. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2017-3067

Kasanen, E., & Lukka, K. (1996). Is Accounting a Global or a Local Discipline? Evidence from Major Research Journals. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 21(7), 755-773.

Larrán-Jorge, M., Escobar-Pérez, B., & García-Meca, E. (2013). El sistema de acreditación nacional: La opinión de los profesores universitarios de Contabilidad. Revista Española de Documentacion Cientifica, 36(3), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2013.3.947

Le Sueur, H., Dagliati, A., Buchan, I., Whetton, A. D., Martin, G. P., Dornan, T., & Geifman, N. (2020). Pride and prejudice-What can we learn from peer review? Medical Teacher, 42(9), 1012-1018. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2020.1774527

Lee, T. A., & Williams, P. F. (1999). Accounting From the Inside: Legitimizing the Accounting Academic Elite. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 10(6), 867-895. https://doi.org/10.1006/cpac.1998.0281

Luukkonen, T. (2012). Conservatism and risk-taking in peer review: Emerging ERC practices. Research Evaluation, 21(1), 48-60. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvs001

Macdonald, S., & Kam, J. (2007). Ring a Ring o'Roses: Quality Journal and Gamesmanship in Management Studies. Journal of Management Studies, 44(4), 640-655. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2007.00704.x

Merchant, K. A., Van Der Stede, W. A., & Zheng, L. (2003). Disciplinary constraints on the advancement of knowledge: The case of organizational incentive systems. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28(2-3), 251-286. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(01)00051-4

Moizer, P. (2009). Publishing in accounting journals: A fair game? Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(2), 285-304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2008.08.003

Oler, D. K., Oler, M. J., Skousen, C. J., & Talakai, J. (2016). Has concentration in the top accounting journals changed over time? Accounting Horizons, 30(1), 63-78. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-51271

Parker, L., Guthrie, J., & Gray, R. (1998). Accounting and management research: passwords from the gatekeepers. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 11(4), 371-406. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513579810231420

Peters, D. P., & Ceci, S. J. (1982). Peer-review practices of psychological journals The fate of published articles, submitted again. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5, 187-195.

Raffournier, B., & Schatt, A. (2010). Is european accounting research fairly reflected in academic journals? An investigation of possible non-mainstream and language barrier biases. In European Accounting Review (Vol. 19, Issue 1). https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180902989368

Roumbanis, L. (2019). Peer Review or Lottery? A Critical Analysis of Two Different Forms of Decision-making Mechanisms for Allocation of Research Grants. Science Technology and Human Values, 44(6), 994-1019. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243918822744

Shijaku, E., & Ceron Hurtado, N. M. (2019). Performance feedback in academic journals: exploring the relationship between journal impact factor and manuscript rejection rates. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2019.15904abstract

Sikdar, S., Tehria, P., Marsili, M., Ganguly, N., & Mukherjee, A. (2020). On the effectiveness of the scientific peer-review system: a case study of the Journal of High Energy Physics. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 21(2), 93-107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-018-0247-9

Spiegel, M. (2012). Reviewing less - Progressing more. Review of Financial Studies, 25(5), 1331-1338. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhs052

Street, C., & Ward, K. W. (2019). Cognitive biasin the peer review process: Understanding a source of friction between reviewers and researchers. Data Base for Advances in Information Systems, 50(4), 52-70. https://doi.org/10.1145/3371041.3371046

Sugimoto, C. R., Larivière, V., Ni, C., & Cronin, B. (2013). Journal acceptance rates: A cross-disciplinary analysis of variability and relationships with journal measures. Journal of Informetrics, 7(4), 897-906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.08.007

Swanson, E. P. (2004). Publishing in the Majors: A Comparison of Accounting, Finance, Management, and Marketing. Contemporary Accounting Research, 21(1), 223-255. https://doi.org/10.1506/RCKM-13FM-GK0E-3W50

Swanson, E. P., Wolfe, C. J., & Zardkoohi, A. (2007). Concentration in Publishing at Top-Tier Business Journals: Evidence and Potential Explanations. Contemporary Accounting Research, 24(4), 1255-1289. https://doi.org/10.1506/car.24.4.9

Tomkins, C., & Groves, R. (1983). The Everyday Accountant and Researching Further Thoughts His Reality. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 8(4), 407-415. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(83)90053-3

Tsang, E. W. K., & Frey, B. S. (2007). The as-is journal review process: Let authors own their ideas. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 6(1), 128-136. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2007.24401710

Victor-Ponce, P., & Muñoz Colomina, C. I. (2016). ¿La investigación española en Contabilidad de Gestión está alejada de la práctica profesional? La opinión académica. Revista de Contabilidad-Spanish Accounting Review, 19(1), 45-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcsar.2015.01.002

Publicado
01-01-2023
Cómo citar
Argilés-Bosch, J. M., Garcia-Blandon, J., & Ravenda, D. (2023). Una aproximación crítica a la evaluación de la calidad de la investigación en contabilidad en el sistema universitario español y a sus implicaciones: A critical approach to the evaluation of the quality of accounting research in the Spanish university system and its implications. Revista de Contabilidad - Spanish Accounting Review, 26(1), 79–96. https://doi.org/10.6018/rcsar.439921
Número
Sección
Artículos

Artículos más leídos del mismo autor/a