:: Volume 1, Issue 1 (9-2016) ::
aapc 2016, 1(1): 25-52 Back to browse issues page
The Historical Roots of Stream Researches in Behavioral Management Accounting:Theories and Research Methods
Fereydoon Rahnamay Roodposhti 1, Sina Kharadyar2 , Mohsen Imeni3
1- Professor of Accounting,Department of Management, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University(Corresponding author) , rahnama.roodposhti@gmail.com
2- Accounting, Branch of Rasht, Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran (Sinakharadyar@gmail.com)
3- Ph.D Student of accounting, Branch of Rasht, Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran (Mohsen.imeni86@yahoo.com)
Abstract:   (45679 Views)

Almost 60 years have passed over since Argyris (1952) published the impact of budgets on people. Few years later, Stedry (1960) and Devine (1960) continued to pursue accounting studies under the influence of psychology. Dyckman and Zeff (1984) define as the Decade of Awakening in the accounting literature. However, it was not before the 1967 that the term “behavioral accounting” appeared in the literature.Various disciplines have contributed, and still are contributing, to the research performed in the behavioral accounting literature. The most important fields are economics, political science, organization theory, psychology, and sociology. Among the diversity of disciplines, it is widely recognized that the main role is played by psychology. The three subfields, not mutually exclusive, which are primarily important in management accounting research, are: cognitive, motivation, and social psychology.The role played by the individual processing of accounting information for decision making, that is the focus of the cognitive psychology theory, is recognized some years later with the so called “cognitive revolution”. Nowadays, the presence of the term “behavioral” is commonly linked to the use of laboratory experiments.

Although they represent the dominant research methods, they are not the only possibility pursued in the behavioral accounting literature. There is also evidence of empirical methods other than experiments such as surveys, field researches, and archival studies. Anyway, laboratory experiments and surveys remain the dominant research methods applied in behavioral management accounting research, while the other possibilities are considered more as an exception. Looking forward, to go more in depth in the decision processes and to understand how and why the brain is activated, neuroscientists are making a bridge with economics giving origin to the so called neuroeconomics.

Keywords: Behavioral Management Accounting, Neuro economics, Cognitive Revolution, Behavioral Accounting Theories.
Full-Text [PDF 209 kb]   (3090 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2016/06/24 | Accepted: 2016/06/24 | Published: 2016/06/24
References
1. Birnberg, J. G., Shields, J. F., (1989). Three decades of behavioral accounting research: A search for order, Behavioral Research in Accounting, 1, pp:23-74.
2. Birnberg, J.C., (2011). A proposed framework for behavioral accounting research, Behavioral Research in Accounting, 23(1), pp:1-43.
3. Birnberg, J.C., (2012). Is neuroaccounting waiting in the wings? An essay, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 37(1), pp:1-13.
4. Birnberg, J.G. Luft, J. Shields, M.D. (2006). Psychology theory in management accounting research. In: Chapman, C. S. Hopwood, A. G., Shields, M. D., (Eds.), Handbook of Management Accounting Research”, Vol. 1, Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
5. Cardinaels, E., (2008). The interplay between cost accounting knowledge and presentation formats in cost-based decision making, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33, pp:582-602
6. Croson, R., (2005). The method of experimental economics, International Negotiation, 10, pp:131-148.
7. Dalla Via, N., (2012), Behavioral management accounting and control: The origins of a stream of research, thesis Ph.D. in Business granted by the University of Venice.
8. DiMaggio, W. Powell, P. (1991). Introduction. In: DiMaggio, W. Powell, P. (Eds.), the new institutionalism in organizational analysis, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago
9. Dunk, A. S., (2001).Behavioral research in management accounting: The past, present, and future, Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research, 4, pp:25-45.
10. Hageman, A.M., (2008). A review of the strengths and weaknesses of archival, behavioral, and qualitative research methods: recognizing the potential benefits of triangulation, Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research, vol(11), pp:1-30.
11. Hopwood, A. (2002). If only there were simple solutions, but there aren’t: some reflections on Zimmerman’s critique of empirical management accounting research, The European Accounting Review, vol.11(4), p:777-785.
12. Hopwood, A. (2009). Reflections and projections – and many, many thanks, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34, pp:887-894.
13. Ittner, C. Larcker, D. (2002). “Empirical management accounting research: are we just describing management consulting practice”. The European Accounting Review, 11(4), pp:787-794.
14. Lipe, M. Salterio, S. (2000). The balanced scorecard: judgment effects of common and unique performance measures,The Accounting Review, 75, 283-298.
15. Luft, J. Shields, M. (2002).Zimmerman’s contentious conjectures: describing the present and prescribing the future of empirical management accounting research,The European Accounting Review, 11(4), pp:795-803.
16. Lukka, K. Mouritsen, J. (2002).Homogeneity and heterogeneity of research in management accounting, The European Accounting Review, 11(4),pp: 805-811.
17. Merchant, K.A. Otley, D.T. (2007). A review of the literature on control and accountability, in Chapman, C.S. Hopwood, A.G. Shields, M.D. (Eds.) Handbook of management accounting research,vol 2, Elsevier, Oxford, UK; P:29.
18. Miller, P. (2007). Management accounting and sociology. In: Chapman, C. S. Hopwood, A. G. Shields, M. D. (Eds.), Handbook of Management Accounting Research, Vol. 1, Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
19. Moers, F. (2005).Discretion and bias in performance evaluation: the impact of diversity and subjectivity, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30, pp:67-80.
20. Otley, David, (2016).The contingency theory of management accounting and control: 1980–2014, Management Accounting Research
21. Riahi-Belkaoui, A. (2002).Behavioral management accounting,Quorum Books, Westport, CT.
22. Shields, J.F. Shields, M.D. (1998). Antecedents of participative budgeting, Accounting, Organizations, and Society, 23(1), pp:49-76
23. Sprinkle, G.B. (2000). The effect of incentive contracts on learning and performance, The Accounting Review, 67,pp: 783-801.
24. Zimmerman, J. L. (2001).Conjectures regarding empirical managerial accounting research,Journal of Accounting and Economics, 32, pp:411-427



XML   Persian Abstract   Print



Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 1, Issue 1 (9-2016) Back to browse issues page