Search results

Research readings groups represent a recent innovation in accounting doctoral education that appears to be spreading at research-oriented universities. In this chapter, the authors describe how accounting research readings groups can serve as a mechanism to engage doctoral students in the consumption and discussion of research throughout all phases of the doctoral program. An accounting research readings group supplements the breadth of knowledge gained in doctoral seminars by adding depth of knowledge in a focal research area. The authors offer insights from the educational psychology literature to justify research readings groups as a form of team-based learning and then offer suggestions on the formation and operation of these groups. The authors enumerate the many benefits that these groups afford to both doctoral students and faculty members. The authors also distribute a survey to faculty organizers of the existing accounting research readings groups and share the results of this survey to supplement their advice with firsthand experiences, the authors also share the results of a survey distributed to faculty organizers of existing accounting research readings groups. The authors’ goal is to encourage the use of accounting research readings groups to inspire, foster, and enhance the research culture within accounting departments and doctoral programs.

The purpose of this paper is to refute See and Gorard’s paper published in this journal in 2015 which argues that parent-based interventions for school readiness are ineffective.

Methods and results from 107 studies that were cited in See and Gorard (2015a) and associated reports were reviewed. Evaluations were made based on comparing the original studies with the summaries of those studies in the publication.

In this rebuttal, the authors show how See and Gorard erred to correctly report methods, sample sizes, outcomes measured, and the actual results of prior research.

The authors suggest that See and Gorard do not provide solid evidence within their article to back up their claims about parent intervention programs. This rigorous review of See and Gorard’s primary sources reveals that the empirical evidence stands contrary to the claims being made. See and Gorard inaccurately reviewed publications which contradict their conclusions, and they relied on a vast amount of unpublished papers by students to support their claims.

The authors demonstrate how See and Gorard misapplied their own standards of evaluation; the authors claim that their source materials contradict the “finding” they purport to present; and the authors argue that they chose lesser known studies when more reputable ones were available.

The purpose of this study is to discuss Kalia, Basu and Kundu's (KBK’s) paper's motivation, findings and contributions and suggest further development.

This paper is to discuss the meta-analysis of board characteristics and demand for audit Quqality by KBK.

KBK paper is well motivated and makes new contributions to the literature. Future research can expand the sample and examine the moderating effects of institutional factors such as ownership structure, regulatory reforms and country-level investor protection and legal enforcement.

Based on the review of KBK’ spaper, this study suggests that future research should expand the sample and examine the moderating effects of institutional factors such as ownership structure, regulatory reforms and country-level investor protection and legal enforcement.

The purpose of this paper is to organize and take stock of the present situation of research on stock market integration by reviewing the available literature, to provide quick and easy access for future researchers. Another objective of the present study is to classify the literature and to provide the comprehensive bibliography on stock market integration and to analyse the findings and results of the studies taken into consideration for review.

A range of sources were searched to review the past literature on stock market integration and out of thousands of papers, 100 research papers form the sample for the present study. These 100 research papers are classified on the basis of various variables to know the status of research on the same topic.

This paper classifies the past literature on stock markets integration and finds that the research work on the same area has been increased during the recent time period, especially from 2005 to 2010 and coverage of stock market integration across emerging economies has increased in recent years. The study revealed many other findings also.

The present paper provides the collection, classification and comprehensive bibliography on stock market integration, which may be helpful for academicians, practitioners and future researchers when studying the existing research work, as well as for considering future researches on the same subject area.

The following classified, annotated list of titles is intended to provide reference librarians with a current checklist of new reference books, and is designed to supplement the RSR review column, “Recent Reference Books,” by Frances Neel Cheney. “Reference Books in Print” includes all additional books received prior to the inclusion deadline established for this issue. Appearance in this column does not preclude a later review in RSR. Publishers are urged to send a copy of all new reference books directly to RSR as soon as published, for immediate listing in “Reference Books in Print.” Reference books with imprints older than two years will not be included (with the exception of current reprints or older books newly acquired for distribution by another publisher). The column shall also occasionally include library science or other library related publications of other than a reference character.

This paper aims to systematically review the existing studies for Accounting and Auditing Organization for Islamic Financial Institutions (AAOIFI) standards which include different tracks of researches and then identify the gaps to propose opportunities for future research.

By adopting a systematic literature review approach, 46 papers that were published between 2000 and 2020 from 23 journals concerned with AAOIFI were selected for review and analysis.

The authors combine electronic searches to identify relevant studies using keywords such as “AAOIFI” or and “Islamic standards.” In light of the existing studies’ limitations, this paper derives and summarizes five leading future research tracks: identifies the research gaps in AAOIFI and then suggests that AAOIFI still requires more empirical analyses; identifies the alternative analytical methods as meta-analysis; identifies additional measurements for macro and microeconomics factors; identifies recent tracks as corresponding to Covid-19 pandemic; and future studies should consider the role of central banks and positive criticism for AAOIFI.

This analysis address the literature gaps on measuring compliance, determinants and consequences of AAOIFI adoption as this study serves as a guide for the researchers, regulators and Islamic financial institutions in research associated with this area. The findings would support AAOIFI, regulators and related authorities across jurisdictions with suggestions on improving the current AAOIFI practices.

This literature review is a historical record and guidance for researchers who seek to examine and explore several questions about AAOIFI. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first paper that applies systematic literature review over AAOIFI research field.

This paper aims to present a review of literature to assess the progress of research on managerial issues in the pharmaceutical industry globally.

Literature from peer‐reviewed journals available on online databases was collected for the last decade, using the keyword search technique, and then classifying it according to major managerial issues, research methodologies used and geographical zones.

Behavioral issues at the consumer/physician level and non‐behavioral issues in pricing and medical expenses are studied the most, followed by supply chain management, research and development and manufacturing and services operations management. There is scope for conjunction of research efforts across themes and players. The studies focus on the developed nations through the application of field research and mathematical modeling techniques. The studies in the American region focus more on development and marketing while studies in Europe are aligned towards manufacturing and distribution in the industry. Studies in the developing nations are mostly exploratory in nature and require more focus on issues of research and development and marketing in addition to a substantial increase in overall research efforts. More trans‐continental studies are needed to consolidate research efforts globally.

The review is not exhaustive of all studies available on the industry and each of the issues. Conference papers, unpublished material and lectures were excluded.

Identification of the present and emerging issues together provides practitioners in healthcare systems with an idea of available techniques and strategies to solve problems in healthcare/pharmaceutical management.

A study on research of management issues in the pharmaceutical industry across the world has perhaps not been conducted in the recent past: this paper fills part of that gap.

In the last year or two the number of ad hoc record‐listing projects in this country has increased quite dramatically. After a long period during which any such initiatives were few and far between, the regular, long‐term work of the major libraries and of the various central and local government record‐holding or ‐listing institutions is now being massively supplemented by a network of non‐official efforts, already numerous enough to amount to a distinct para‐activity of their own.

The scientific correspondence between Harrod and Robertson was initiated by Harrod’s criticism of Robertson’s Banking Policy and the Price Level (1926).⁷ Harrod first wrote on 18 May 1926 (letter 2) raising at once the following “salient point”: Much of your argument depends on the view that justifiable expansions and contractions as defined by you are desirable. Why are they desirable? You give reasons on p. 22 why you think some instability in output desirable. But the reasons mentioned there (and I can’t find any others) don’t seem particularly directed to show that the special form of instability constituted by the so-called “justifiable” expansions and contractions is desirable. They seem to me to show that perhaps some instability, that, presumably, of less degree than we have been accustomed to in the past, is good, but by no means precisely how much is good. Thus, suppose the “hypothetical group member” or “the actual workman” of p. 19 were able to govern output according to their own self interest, there would still, according to the arguments of ch. 2, be some instability. Would not that be enough? Or if you want more, why stop at the “justifiable”? Why not have some of that due to “secondary” causes? It seems to me that you have been led away by purely aesthetic interests to identify that more moderate amount of instability which we really need (as shown on p. 22.) with that which we would get: (i) if secondary causes were removed; and (ii) if control of output stayed where it is now – in the hands of the entrepreneur. I don’t see how you can say to the banks more than “damp down fluctuation a bit, but leave some fluctuation, as that is healthful for the body economic”.He added two notes to his letter, in the first of which he commented upon the four proposed courses of policy outlined by Robertson on pp. 25–26 of his book. In the second note Harrod suggested that Robertson’s calculations in Appendix I to Ch. 5 of Banking Policy assumed the following behaviour of the public: (i) People do not allow for the effect of their withholding on the price level (this is reasonable). (ii) They are ignorant as the future course of inflation (or do nothing to meet it). (iii) On this basis they decide what withholding is necessary to restore H, decide that it would be too much effort to restore it at once, and…spread the restoration over K – 1 days. It so happens that by choosing K – 1 their 2 errors (or failures to take everything into account) cancel each other out, and they do effect the restoration in that time. If K or K – 2 had been chosen, this would not have been so.Harrod further argued that Robertson’s “so-called reasonable assumption of a restoration in K – 1 days is purely arbitrary,” and that “all this reasoning is rendered of doubtful value by the fact that we must suppose an alteration in view as to ‘the appropriate proportion between Real Hoarding and Real Income’ during the process of inflation. Not only will people not replenish H at once, but they may well voluntarily reduce it.”