CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 9

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Formal accountability, perceived accountability and aggressive reporting judgements

Pan, Peipei, Patel, Chris·2022·Accounting and Business Research
DOI 10.1080/00014788.2020.1836469
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We extend the literature on accountability in an experimental setting to examine the influence of formal accountability, individual-level perceived accountability and their interactions on accountants’ aggressive judgements in China. Individual-level perceived accountability is based on the phenomenological perspective, which recognises that its intrinsic nature is derived from multiple sources known as the ‘web of accountabilities’ in socialisation processes. Researchers suggest that perceived accountability is fidelity to ‘personal conscience’ in individuals’ moral values and their internal sense of moral obligations. Our findings show that when formal accountability was imposed, accountants were not aggressive in making their reporting judgements, irrespective of their scores on perceived accountability measures. In contrast, when formal accountability was not imposed, accountants who scored higher (lower) on perceived accountability measures were less (more) aggressive in making reporting judgements. Our results further show that imposition of formal accountability is not equally important in influencing the judgements of accountants who scored higher on perceived accountability measures and those who scored lower on those measures. Our findings have implications for determining which accountability frameworks could be developed to assist global standard setters, national regulators and organisations, including accounting firms, constrain aggressive financial reporting so…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00014788.2020.1836469

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 136

  1. 10.2308/accr.00000045 · DOI
  2. 10.1108/AAAJ-02-2015-1969 · DOI
  3. 10.1111/j.1911-3846.2012.01193.x · DOI
  4. Ang J.S., 2014, Journal of Business Ethics, 134, 1
  5. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1994.tb01728.x · DOI
  6. 10.2308/aud.2010.29.2.141 · DOI
  7. 10.1016/j.cpa.2002.08.001 · DOI
  8. 10.1016/j.cpa.2009.11.004 · DOI
  9. 10.1080/00014788.2016.1182710 · DOI
  10. 10.1016/j.cpa.2018.09.003 · DOI
  11. 10.1111/j.1911-3846.1997.tb00538.x · DOI
  12. 10.1080/09638180.2013.809977 · DOI
  13. 10.1111/j.1467-6281.2006.00197.x · DOI
  14. 10.1016/S0278-4254(02)00042-X · DOI
  15. 10.1023/A:1011957832141 · DOI
  16. 10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2008.09.002 · DOI
  17. 10.1093/ser/mwm015 · DOI
  18. Borst, N. and Lardy, N., 2015. Maintaining financial stability in the People’s Republic of China during financial liberalization (March). Peterson Institute for International Economics Working Paper No. 15–4. Available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2588543 or https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2588543 [Accessed 15 January 2016]. · DOI
  19. 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1991.tb00526.x · DOI
  20. 10.1006/cpac.2000.0434 · DOI
  21. 10.1016/j.aos.2012.12.002 · DOI
  22. 10.1016/j.jebo.2011.08.009 · DOI · Paper page
  23. 10.1016/j.aos.2011.11.001 · DOI
  24. 10.1016/j.najef.2015.10.012 · DOI
  25. 10.1080/00014788.2019.1611715 · DOI
  26. Cohen J., 1988, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
  27. 10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.07.003 · DOI
  28. 10.2308/acch-50502 · DOI
  29. 10.1016/j.aos.2017.08.003 · DOI
  30. 10.1177/0899764013503906 · DOI
  31. 10.31234/osf.io/3bdfu · DOI
  32. 10.1111/joms.12254 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Cuccia A.D., 1995, The Accounting Review, 70, 227
  34. 10.1016/j.aos.2018.10.001 · DOI
  35. 10.1257/aer.20171330 · DOI
  36. 10.1016/j.aos.2005.09.001 · DOI
  37. 10.1108/IJOTB-06-03-2003-B002 · DOI
  38. 10.2308/ajpt-51303 · DOI
  39. 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2010.01614.x · DOI
  40. 10.1016/j.aos.2006.09.008 · DOI
  41. 10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149 · DOI · Paper page
  42. 10.1016/j.mar.2019.100650 · DOI
  43. Field A., 2005, Discovering Statistics Using SPSS
  44. 10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2011.08.001 · DOI
  45. Frink D.D., 1998, Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 16, 1
  46. 10.1016/j.hrmr.2004.02.001 · DOI · Paper page
  47. 10.1016/S0742-7301(08)27005-2 · DOI
  48. 10.1016/j.hrmr.2004.02.007 · DOI
  49. 10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1225 · DOI
  50. 10.1177/1745691614551642 · DOI · Paper page
  51. 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.02.011 · DOI
  52. 10.1016/j.joep.2007.09.002 · DOI
  53. 10.1007/s10672-010-9148-9 · DOI
  54. 10.1016/j.bushor.2007.04.005 · DOI
  55. Hall A.T., 2003, New Directions in Human Resource Management, 29
  56. 10.1037/1076-8998.11.1.87 · DOI
  57. 10.1002/job.2052 · DOI · Paper page
  58. 10.2308/ajpt-51576 · DOI
  59. 10.1017/CBO9780511527869.005 · DOI
  60. 10.1037/0022-3514.72.3.515 · DOI · Paper page
  61. 10.1002/job.324 · DOI
  62. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.09.003 · DOI
  63. 10.1007/s10551-011-0793-1 · DOI
  64. 10.2308/accr.2000.75.3.257 · DOI
  65. 10.2308/accr.2010.85.4.1325 · DOI
  66. 10.1016/j.mar.2006.03.003 · DOI
  67. 10.1506/TF76-653L-R36N-13YP · DOI
  68. 10.1506/R0MH-W9H9-CQJD-1356 · DOI
  69. 10.1111/1911-3846.12431 · DOI
  70. 10.1016/j.aos.2015.03.001 · DOI
  71. 10.1007/s10551-006-9226-y · DOI
  72. 10.2307/2491272 · DOI
  73. 10.2307/2491456 · DOI
  74. 10.1111/acfi.12084 · DOI
  75. 10.1080/09638180.2011.629416 · DOI
  76. 10.1108/JMP-08-2014-0227 · DOI
  77. Lee C.J., 2001, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 26, 673
  78. 10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.255 · DOI · Paper page
  79. 10.1080/01972240490423049 · DOI
  80. 10.1016/j.chieco.2014.08.003 · DOI
  81. Liang H., 2007, Academy of Management Proceedings, 1, 1, 10.5465/ambpp.2007.26523191 · DOI
  82. 10.1016/j.aos.2015.09.003 · DOI
  83. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.11.001 · DOI
  84. 10.1037/0022-3514.83.4.854 · DOI
  85. 10.1016/j.aos.2016.08.004 · DOI
  86. 10.1016/j.aos.2014.07.005 · DOI
  87. 10.1007/s10551-016-3348-7 · DOI
  88. 10.1080/00014788.2020.1736494 · DOI
  89. 10.1080/20954816.2016.1152094 · DOI
  90. 10.1111/1911-3846.12051 · DOI
  91. 10.1016/j.racreg.2013.08.008 · DOI
  92. 10.1177/0149206312441208 · DOI
  93. 10.1016/j.aos.2013.12.002 · DOI
  94. 10.1016/j.aos.2009.07.003 · DOI
  95. 10.1111/1467-9299.00218 · DOI · Paper page
  96. Nunnally J.C., 1978, Psychometric Theory
  97. 10.1108/AAAJ-10-2013-1488 · DOI
  98. 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00600.x · DOI
  99. 10.1016/j.aos.2014.10.001 · DOI
  100. 10.1007/s10551-013-1994-6 · DOI
  101. 10.1016/j.aos.2013.07.002 · DOI
  102. 10.1080/00014788.2016.1198684 · DOI
  103. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2014.10.008 · DOI
  104. 10.2308/ajpt-52334 · DOI
  105. 10.2308/bria-50918 · DOI
  106. 10.1111/j.1467-629X.2007.00212.x · DOI
  107. 10.1111/j.1467-6281.2004.00144.x · DOI
  108. 10.1016/j.aos.2009.04.005 · DOI
  109. 10.1108/03068291011070471 · DOI
  110. 10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.11.002 · DOI
  111. 10.1007/s10551-013-1989-3 · DOI
  112. 10.1108/02686901111129553 · DOI
  113. 10.1016/S0361-3682(01)00036-8 · DOI
  114. 10.1016/0361-3682(93)E0003-Y · DOI
  115. 10.1007/s10551-013-1662-x · DOI
  116. 10.1080/00014788.2010.9663387 · DOI
  117. 10.1016/j.aos.2009.01.007 · DOI
  118. 10.1016/j.aos.2015.07.002 · DOI
  119. 10.1111/acfi.12286 · DOI
  120. Sutton R.I., 2014, Scaling Up the Excellence. Getting to More Without Settling for Less
  121. 10.2308/acch.2000.14.1.93 · DOI
  122. Taplin R., 2014, Regulation and Governance, 8, 310, 10.1111/rego.12011 · DOI
  123. Tetlock P.E., 1985, Research in Organizational Behavior, 7, 297
  124. 10.1108/AAAJ-07-2014-1765 · DOI
  125. 10.1108/09513570610670334 · DOI
  126. 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.12.005 · DOI
  127. 10.1080/09638180.2017.1304228 · DOI
  128. 10.1111/j.1911-3846.2010.01032.x · DOI
  129. 10.1111/joms.12283 · DOI
  130. 10.1177/2041386619878876 · DOI
  131. 10.1016/j.cjar.2011.09.001 · DOI
  132. 10.1111/1911-3846.12454 · DOI
  133. 10.1016/j.bar.2017.09.010 · DOI
  134. 10.1007/s10490-018-9567-y · DOI
  135. 10.1080/00014788.2019.1686695 · DOI
  136. 10.1007/s10551-016-3025-x · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 9

Metadata

Authors
Pan, P., & Patel, C.
Affiliations
Department of Accounting and Corporate Governance, Macquarie Business School, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
ORCID
Venue
Accounting and Business Research
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2020-11-19
Volume
52
Issue
1
Pages
67-93
ISSN
  • 0001-4788
  • 2159-4260
DOI
10.1080/00014788.2020.1836469
Cited by
9
References
1
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review