Accounting Academics’ Perceptions of 12 Research Journals

Abstract

This paper reports perceptions of over 1,000 accounting faculty regarding 12 accounting journals, specifically in: (1) how open they are to diverse topic areas, (2) how open they are to diverse research methodologies, (3) how effectively they produce new and useful knowledge for non-academic stakeholders, and (4) how effectively they produce new and useful knowledge for academics. We find that the traditional Top 6 journals do not lead the academy along these four dimensions; in fact, some are viewed as the worst performers in these areas. Furthermore, we find that academics have a relatively poor understanding of the actual diversity of several journals. We also report that respondents believe the traditional Top 6 journals are and should continue to be weighted highly in faculty evaluation, but that the other six journals should receive greater weighting.