性别不是“假变量”:当前会计性别研究述评

Kris Hardies, Rihab Khalifa
{"title":"性别不是“假变量”:当前会计性别研究述评","authors":"Kris Hardies, Rihab Khalifa","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1433361","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is growing interest among auditing researchers for the idea that certain auditor judgments, decisions, and behaviors (and, thus, audit quality) might differ depending on the auditor being a man or a woman. Although we think this is a genuine line of research, we warn in this article against four methodological pitfalls. First, gender should not be equated to sex. Second, the existence of psychological sex differences is highly questionable. Third, auditors are not a random sample of the general population but a well selected subpopulation. Fourth, the presence of gender differences is context-dependent. Based upon these methodological issues, we make three propositions for future gender research in auditing and related domains. First, we advise careful use of terminology. Second, we urge that sex differences within specific subpopulations are examined instead of assumed. Third, we suggest researchers to look for gender-based (instead of sex-based) explanations. Although the focus in this article is on auditor gender, our propositions offer valuable insights to all accounting, tax, and finance ‘gender’ research.","PeriodicalId":84919,"journal":{"name":"International demographics","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gender is Not 'A Dummy Variable': A Discussion of Current Gender Research in Accounting\",\"authors\":\"Kris Hardies, Rihab Khalifa\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1433361\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There is growing interest among auditing researchers for the idea that certain auditor judgments, decisions, and behaviors (and, thus, audit quality) might differ depending on the auditor being a man or a woman. Although we think this is a genuine line of research, we warn in this article against four methodological pitfalls. First, gender should not be equated to sex. Second, the existence of psychological sex differences is highly questionable. Third, auditors are not a random sample of the general population but a well selected subpopulation. Fourth, the presence of gender differences is context-dependent. Based upon these methodological issues, we make three propositions for future gender research in auditing and related domains. First, we advise careful use of terminology. Second, we urge that sex differences within specific subpopulations are examined instead of assumed. Third, we suggest researchers to look for gender-based (instead of sex-based) explanations. Although the focus in this article is on auditor gender, our propositions offer valuable insights to all accounting, tax, and finance ‘gender’ research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":84919,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International demographics\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-01-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International demographics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1433361\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International demographics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1433361","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

审计研究人员越来越感兴趣的是,某些审计师的判断、决策和行为(以及审计质量)可能会因审计师是男性还是女性而有所不同。虽然我们认为这是一个真正的研究路线,但我们在本文中警告要注意方法论上的四个陷阱。首先,性别不应该等同于性。第二,心理性别差异的存在是非常值得怀疑的。第三,审核员不是一般人群中的随机样本,而是经过精心挑选的亚群体。第四,性别差异的存在依赖于语境。基于这些方法论问题,我们对未来审计及相关领域的性别研究提出了三点建议。首先,我们建议谨慎使用术语。其次,我们敦促对特定亚种群内的性别差异进行检查,而不是假设。第三,我们建议研究人员寻找基于性别(而不是基于性别)的解释。虽然本文的重点是审计师的性别,但我们的主张为所有会计、税务和金融“性别”研究提供了有价值的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Gender is Not 'A Dummy Variable': A Discussion of Current Gender Research in Accounting
There is growing interest among auditing researchers for the idea that certain auditor judgments, decisions, and behaviors (and, thus, audit quality) might differ depending on the auditor being a man or a woman. Although we think this is a genuine line of research, we warn in this article against four methodological pitfalls. First, gender should not be equated to sex. Second, the existence of psychological sex differences is highly questionable. Third, auditors are not a random sample of the general population but a well selected subpopulation. Fourth, the presence of gender differences is context-dependent. Based upon these methodological issues, we make three propositions for future gender research in auditing and related domains. First, we advise careful use of terminology. Second, we urge that sex differences within specific subpopulations are examined instead of assumed. Third, we suggest researchers to look for gender-based (instead of sex-based) explanations. Although the focus in this article is on auditor gender, our propositions offer valuable insights to all accounting, tax, and finance ‘gender’ research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Behavioral Economics of Accounting: A Review of Archival Research on Individual Decision Makers Measuring and Calibrating the Racial/Ethnic Densities of Executives in US Public Companies Gender Salary Gap in the Auditing Profession: Trend and Explanations The Impact of CFO Gender on Corporate Overinvestment Getting Women on Board: Some Reflections on Research on Board Gender Diversity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1