Emerald logo
Advanced search

Educators’ Epistemological Beliefs of Accounting Ethics Teaching: A Cross‐Cultural Study

Pak K. Auyeung (Griffith Business School, Griffith University)
Ron Dagwell (Griffith Business School, Griffith University)
Chew Ng (Griffith Business School, Griffith University)
John Sands (Griffith Business School, Griffith University)

Accounting Research Journal

ISSN: 1030-9616

Publication date: 1 December 2006

Abstract

This study is an exploratory examination of cultural differences in accounting educators’ epistemological beliefs of accounting ethics education. It is motivated by a renewed global interest in accounting ethics in recent years following the reported breaches of ethical conducts by individuals from different cultures. In Pratt’s model, conceptions of teaching should be an interdependent and internally consistent trilogy of beliefs, intentions and actions. The purpose of this empirical study is to sketch an outline of how accounting ethics education is broadly understood by accounting educators from three different cultural backgrounds, the Anglo‐influenced Australian, the Chinese and the Moslem‐dominated Malaysian. It explores the cross‐cultural variations in their epistemological beliefs of what to teach, objectives to achieve, the ethics educator, and the learning process. Results suggest that Australian and Malaysian accounting educators differed significantly in their epistemological beliefs on the source of knowledge as well as the acquisition of knowledge. Interestingly, there were no significant statistical differences in the epistemological beliefs held by participants in this study concerning other issues in accounting ethics education, i.e. the delivery of ethics education, transferability, goals of ethics education, separate course, and qualification.

Keywords

  • Accounting ethics
  • Accounting educators

Citation

Auyeung, P., Dagwell, R., Ng, C. and Sands, J. (2006), "Educators’ Epistemological Beliefs of Accounting Ethics Teaching: A Cross‐Cultural Study", Accounting Research Journal, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 122-138. https://doi.org/10.1108/10309610680000683

Download as .RIS

Publisher

:

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2006, Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Please note you might not have access to this content

You may be able to access this content by login via Shibboleth, Open Athens or with your Emerald account.
Login
To rent this content from Deepdyve, please click the button.
Rent from Deepdyve
If you would like to contact us about accessing this content, click the button and fill out the form.
Contact us
Emerald Publishing
  • Opens in new window
  • Opens in new window
  • Opens in new window
  • Opens in new window
© 2019 Emerald Publishing Limited

Services

  • Authors Opens in new window
  • Editors Opens in new window
  • Librarians Opens in new window
  • Researchers Opens in new window
  • Reviewers Opens in new window

About

  • About Emerald Opens in new window
  • Working for Emerald Opens in new window
  • Contact us Opens in new window
  • Publication Sitemap

Policies and information

  • Legal Opens in new window
  • Editorial policy Opens in new window & originality guidelines Opens in new window
  • Site policies
  • Modern Slavery Act Opens in new window

We’re listening — tell us what you think

  • Something didn’t work…

    Report bugs here

  • All feedback is valuable

    Please share your general feedback

  • Member of Emerald’s Library Advisory Network?

    You can start or join in a discussion here.
    If you’d like to know more about The Network, please email us

Join us on our journey

  • Platform update page

    Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

  • Frequently Asked Questions

    Your questions answered here