Search results

This paper examines how accounting concepts were utilised in domestic waste collection services in Ireland over the past two decades or so. In comparison to other former “free” services in the Irish context, the prevalence of accounting concepts has been greater and delivered a more successful outcome.

Drawing on the concepts of calculation, the “economic” and economization, events around domestic waste policy in Ireland are examined, and the increasing prevalence of concepts such as price, cost and profitability in these processes are a focal point. Publicly available documents such as government policy documents, parliamentary records and media reports are utilised to draw out these concepts. The period of analysis is 1996–2018.

The findings reveal the role of accounting concepts in the economization of domestic waste policy in Ireland. The result of the economization process was a fully privatised, profit-oriented, price-monitored system.

This research provides a broad view of accounting concepts in the management of domestic waste. It highlights how waste policy in Ireland travelled through instances of being political and economic over time. The research is limited by its use of secondary data.

This study highlights how accounting concepts were used in varying ways to bring about a satisfactory solution to domestic waste disposal in Ireland, namely the privatisation of waste services.

Drawing on the semantic field theory, the paper aims to uncover the challenges of importing and translating a management accounting concept into the Russian language and the semantic nature of resistance towards the imported management accounting concept.

The paper draws on the extensive literature review of the histories of accounting in the Soviet Union and the United States in the first part of the twentieth century and 17 interviews conducted with the Russian accounting academics.

We demonstrate the case of resistance in adopting the imported Anglo-Saxon management accounting concept. We also discuss historical underpinning and origins of this resistance in light of semantic field theory.

The paper calls for more research in the non-Anglo-Saxon contexts problematizing conventional assumptions and beliefs about objectivity and universality of accounting language.

The study demonstrates the importance of understanding historical and cross-cultural developments of accounting language for accounting educators and practitioners. Critical awareness of the differences in semantic fields of accounting can help accounting researchers and educators to develop contextualized research projects and context-relevant teaching practices.

The study contributes to the literature on translations of accounting concepts by demonstrating that accounting concepts are not understood in isolation, instead, they are interpreted in relation to each other. The present study demonstrates that the relationship between the management accounting concept (the signifier) and its meanings (signifieds) is fluid, culturally and historically contingent. To understand this relationship, we should attend to the historical development of semantic fields and associative relations between concepts.

This experimental study investigates the connotative (measured) meaning of the concept “auditor independence” within three audit engagement case contexts, including two acknowledged in the literature to represent significant potential threats to independence. The study’s research design utilises the measurement of meaning (semantic differential) framework originally proposed by Osgood et al. (1957). Findings indicate that research participants considered the concept of independence within a two factor cognitive structure comprising “emphasis” and “variability” dimensions. Participants’ connotations of independence varied along both these dimensions in response to the alternative experimental case scenarios. In addition, participants’ perceptions of the auditor’s independence in the three cases were systematically associated with the identified connotative meaning dimensions.

This study aims to extend the current literature on International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) teaching by examining the argument by Hodgdon et al. (2013) that arranging accounting prescriptions into the level of concept, principle and rules is helpful to students in comprehending the complex set of accounting standards. Besides, the study aims to attest the argument that analogy is a useful tool in teaching, especially when dealing with complex knowledge or concepts.

The study used a 3 × 2 between-subjects design, which includes the independent variables of the three-step teaching method (concept-only, concept + principle and concept + principle + rules) and the presence or absence of analogy.

The findings support Hodgdon et al. (2013). However, the combination of Hodgdon et al.’s (2013) technique with analogy resulted in only better-perceived comprehension under the concept-only condition.

There are limitations to the use of analogy as an instructional tool. The reasoning behind an analogy is that it is produced from different fields in which the target and source topics have only some similarity in structure or function. This suggests a limited capacity in which the source topic can be used to fully explain a targeted topic, and thus caution needs to be exercised in the use of analogy as a teaching tool. Additionally, this study uses a perceived understanding of control in IFRS 15. While perceived understanding may likely result in actual comprehension, there is a possibility that this may not be the case. Finally, this study did not consider about how rule comprehensiveness is affected.

The findings of this study provide a useful combination of teaching tools to educators on how to deliver technical business subjects such as accounting effectively.

This paper aims to answer the call by Hodgdon et al. (2013) to verify the effectiveness of teaching IFRS via the three-step approach. In addition, this study extends the literature by examining whether an analogy could be used with the three-step approach to effectively improve students’ understanding of IFRS.

This paper aims to examine the historical evolution and popularity of activity-based thinking in management accounting. As an organising framework, this paper applies the lens of management fashion theory, which is a perspective that is well suited to the examination of the lifecycles of management accounting concepts and ideas.

This paper pursues a bibliographic approach to better understand the past and present state of activity-based thinking. Thus, this paper attempts to piece together a mosaic picture by synthesising existing research on activity-based thinking from a wide range of academic and practitioner-oriented sources.

While the original activity-based costing (ABC) model has evolved and broadened and has generated new related concepts, studies suggest that it is not as successful as accounting concepts such as the balanced scorecard. The overall popularity trajectory of activity-based thinking can be considered to be negative, and it is currently not receiving much attention in accounting journals.

This paper is based on desk research and is limited by a reliance on secondary sources. In addition, it may be subject to the authors’ own biases when it comes to defining relevant articles studied.

This paper provides more insight into the evolution and popularity of activity-based thinking and discusses some of the reasons why it is not more widely used in practice.

Although many studies have examined the diffusion of ABC-related techniques, most are quite dated. More than 30 years have passed since the coining of the ABC term, and the time is ripe to provide a historical re-examination of the impact of this type of thinking in the field of accounting and to consider the latest developments and trends.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the concept of translation equivalence in extant research on translation in accounting: What is the equivalence that is expected of translation, and how is it assumed to come into being? This paper presents a coherent, theoretically informed approach to how different views on equivalence are connected to the objective of international comparability in financial accounting and how related, often-underlying assumptions intertwine in this discussion.

This paper takes an interdisciplinary approach by utilizing equivalence theories from the discipline of translation studies. It canvasses two dichotomy-like approaches – natural versus directional equivalence and formal versus dynamic equivalence – to compose a theoretical framework within which to analyze 25 translation-related papers discussing accounting harmonization published from 1989 to 2018.

This paper presents evidence of theoretical contradictions likely to affect the development of translation research in accounting if they go unrecognized. Moreover, the analysis suggests that these contradictions are likely to originate in the assumptions of mainstream accounting research, which neglect both the constructed nature of equivalence and the socially constructed nature of accounting concepts.

Despite the significance of translation for the objective of international comparability, this paper is the first comprehensive theoretical approach to equivalence in accounting research. It responds to a recognized demand for studying equivalence and its limitations, challenges many of the expectations accounting research places on translation and discusses the possible origins of related assumptions.

Accounting practices vary not only across firms, but also across countries, reflecting the respective legal and cultural background. Attempts at harmonization therefore continue to be rebuffed. The purpose of this paper is to argue that different wordings in national laws, and different interpretations of similar wordings in national laws, can be explained by taking recourse to the philosophy of language, referring particularly to Searle and Wittgenstein.

The example of the substance over form principle, investigated in seven countries, is particularly suitable for this analysis. It is known in all accounting jurisdictions, but still has very different roots in different European countries, with European and international influences conflicting, which is reflected in the different wording of the principle from one country to the next, and the different socially constructed realities associated with those wordings.

This paper shows that, beyond accounting practices, the legal and cultural background of a country affects the wording of national law itself. The broad conclusion is that different socially constructed realities might tend to resist any attempt at harmonized socially constructed words.

The paper contributes to the debate surrounding the possible homogenization of accounting regulations, illustrating the theory of the social construction of both “reality” and “language” on the specific application of one common principle to various Member State environments.

The use of technical terms to communicate accounting information can lead to misunderstandings when the meaning of such terms is not fully appreciated by the recipient of the information. The discipline of translation studies suggests that full equivalence in translation between languages is rare. This suggests that the risk of misunderstanding is exacerbated when technical terms are translated into another language. This paper examines the implications of mistranslations of technical terms in the context of theories from linguistics, which suggest that language influences the way we think. It uses three examples of accounting terminology to illustrate these problems. It concludes that the choice of an inappropriate label in the translation of accounting terminology is detrimental to international accounting communication and creates problems for users and preparers of translated financial statements as well as for researchers in, and students of, international accounting and for those involved in harmonisation and standardisation of accounting.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the impact on communication of changes in an accounting standard arising from the transition to International Financial Reporting Standards. It investigates inter and intragroup differences in measured connotative meaning of the old and new definitions of “cash”, as held by three key groups of parties to the accounting communication process (preparers, auditors and users); and determines the effect of changes in connotative meaning on decision behaviour (outcomes).

The study adopted a between‐participants 2×3 factorial design whereby the first factor reflected the definition type: old vs new definition of the concept “cash”; while the second reflected three financial reporting groups: preparers, auditors and users. The semantic differential technique developed by Osgood, Suci and Tannenbaum was used to measure connotative meaning.

The study finds that the three financial reporting groups do not share the same meaning of the concept “cash” and that the introduction of the new definition has changed the interpreted connotative meaning for these three groups. A link between measured meaning and the decisions made by the participants was also established.

The explanatory power of the typical three (evaluative, potency and activity) factor structure should be acknowledged; these factors typically explain 50 per cent of the total phenomena known as “meaning”. The study's findings make an important contribution to the earnings management and creative accounting literature.

The findings are particularly relevant to standard‐setters and regulators as a lack of shared meaning may lead to unnecessary misunderstandings and tensions among the many parties to the reporting process.

The study extends prior measurement of meaning studies in accounting through first, the inclusion of all three major groups of parties to the accounting communication process; second, examination of an accounting concept which is defined differently by two accounting standards in the same jurisdiction; and last, investigation of the impact on decision behaviour (outcomes) resulting from changes in meaning brought about through the introduction of a new standard across the three groups.

The purpose of this study is to investigate whether the recent reduction in the volume and complexity of the financial accounting curriculum, which is examinable as part of the qualification process of chartered accountants in South Africa, has resulted in improvements in students’ understanding of core accounting concepts. The reasons for the curriculum reduction are to encourage life-long learning, reduce syllabus overload and focus on core principles.

A sample of 514 students completed an assessment designed to test core concepts. Approximately half the students had been exposed to the previous, larger and more complex curriculum; the other half had only been exposed to the reduced, simpler ‘core’ curriculum.

Although the assessment results of the two cohorts were not significantly different, the latter cohort made significantly less conceptual errors than the former cohort, even though the latter cohort was relatively novice. This finding supports the hypothesis that the reduced curriculum assists students’ understanding of core concepts. Furthermore, it aligns with Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) in that the reduction in examinable content reduces intrinsic load within cognitive load, thereby optimising student learning, as measured by assessment results and error rates.

The findings of this study have relevance for professional accounting bodies responsible for approving curriculum; accounting and other academics interested in the consequences of curriculum reduction on student learning and researchers applying CLT across other disciplines, specifically focussed on the relationship between intrinsic load and learning efficiency.