{"title":"论财务会计中的资产负债、收支紧张关系","authors":"Thomas A. Lee","doi":"10.2308/aahj-2023-003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Recent comments on the FASB preference for the asset-liability focus in its conceptual framework motivate this historical perspective on the early accounting tension between it and the alternative revenue-expense focus. The commentary identifies and reviews significant pre-1980s studies indicative of focus preference and finds pre-FASB lack of consensus on the issue. The commentary concludes that this lack of consensus will continue in the absence of a coherent body of abstract knowledge that is capable of giving professional authority to mandated accounting standards.","PeriodicalId":43735,"journal":{"name":"Accounting Historians Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the Asset-Liability, Revenue-Expense Tension in Financial Accounting\",\"authors\":\"Thomas A. Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.2308/aahj-2023-003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Recent comments on the FASB preference for the asset-liability focus in its conceptual framework motivate this historical perspective on the early accounting tension between it and the alternative revenue-expense focus. The commentary identifies and reviews significant pre-1980s studies indicative of focus preference and finds pre-FASB lack of consensus on the issue. The commentary concludes that this lack of consensus will continue in the absence of a coherent body of abstract knowledge that is capable of giving professional authority to mandated accounting standards.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43735,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounting Historians Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounting Historians Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2308/aahj-2023-003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounting Historians Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2308/aahj-2023-003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
On the Asset-Liability, Revenue-Expense Tension in Financial Accounting
Recent comments on the FASB preference for the asset-liability focus in its conceptual framework motivate this historical perspective on the early accounting tension between it and the alternative revenue-expense focus. The commentary identifies and reviews significant pre-1980s studies indicative of focus preference and finds pre-FASB lack of consensus on the issue. The commentary concludes that this lack of consensus will continue in the absence of a coherent body of abstract knowledge that is capable of giving professional authority to mandated accounting standards.
期刊介绍:
Accounting Historians Journal is an international journal that addresses the development of accounting thought and practice. AHJ embraces all subject matter related to accounting history, including but not limited to research that provides historical perspective on contemporary issues.