Skip to main content
Log in

Ethical Practice in the Accounting Publishing Process: Contrasting Opinions of Authors and Editors

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Academic accounting researchers often offer anecdotal evidence that the publishing process is rife with unfair and unethical practices, and similar contradictory evidence supports accounting journal editors' claims that the process is fair and ethical. This study compares the perceptions of accounting authors and editors on the ethicacy and frequency of specific author, editor and reviewer practices. Both authors and editors are in general agreement about the ethical nature of editors and author practices. However, there are significant differences between the groups regarding reviewer behavior, and regarding the frequency of occurrence of questionable author, editor and reviewer practices. Additionally, the majority of authors believe that codes of publishing ethics are needed, while editors do not. Women authors are significantly more supportive of such ethical codes when compared to their male counterparts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ameen, E., D. Guffey and J. McMillan: 1996, ‘Gender Differences in Determining the Ethical Sensitivity of Future Accounting Professionals’, Journal of Business Ethics 15(5), 591–597.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, J.: 1982, ‘Research on Scientific Journals: Implications for Editors and Authors’, Journal of Forecasting 1, 83–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Betz, M., L. O'Connell and J. Shepard: 1989, ‘Gender Differences in Proclivity for Unethical Behavior’, Journal of Business Ethics 8, 321–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blank, R.: 1991, ‘The Effects of Double-blind Versus Single-blind Reviewing: Experimental Evidence from The American Economic Review’, American Economic Review 81(5) (December), 1041–1067.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borkowski, S. C. and Y. J. Ugras: 1998, ‘Business Students and Ethics: A Meta Analysis’, Journal of Business Ethics(Forthcoming).

  • Carland, J., J. Carland and C. Aby: 1992, ‘Proposed Codification of Ethicacy in the Publication Process’, Journal of Business Ethics 11(2) (February), 95–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crain, J. and P. Carruth: 1992, ‘Academic Accounting Research: Opinions of Academicians on Recommendations for Improving Ethical Behavior’, The Accounting Educators' Journal IV(2), 27–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeGeorge, R. and F. Woodward: 1994, ‘Ethics and Manuscript Reviewing’, Journal of Scholarly Publishing 25(3) (April), 133–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickersin, K.: 1990, ‘The Existence of Publication Bias and Risk Factors for its Occurrence’, Journal of the American Medical Association 263(10) (March 9), 1385–1389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engle, T. and J. Smith: 1992, ‘Accounting Faculty Involvement with Activities of Ethical Concern’, The Accounting Educators' Journal IV, 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fine, M. and L. Kurdek: 1994, ‘Publishing Multiple Journal Articles from a Single Data Set: Issues and Recommendations’, Journal of Family Psychology 8(4) (December), 371–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford, R. and W. Richardson: 1994, ‘Ethical Decision Making: A Review of Empirical Literature’, Journal of Business Ethics 13, 205–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freese, L.: 1979, ‘On Changing Some Role Relationships in the Editorial Review Process’, American Sociologist 14, 231–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammermesh, D.: 1994, ‘Facts and Myths about Refereeing’, Journal of Economic Perspectives 8(1) (Winter), 153–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keys, D. and J. Hendricks: 1984, ‘The Ethics of 30 Susan C. Borkowski and Mary Jeanne WelshAccounting Research’, Journal of Accounting Education 2(2) (Fall), 77–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laband, D. and M. Piette: 1994a, ‘Does the “Blindness” of Peer Review Influence Manuscript Selection Efficiency?’, Southern Economic Journal 60(April), 896–906.

  • Laband, D. and M. Piette: 1994b, ‘Favoritism Versus Search for Good Papers: Empirical Evidence regarding the Behavior of Journal Editors’, Journal of Political Economy 102(1) (February), 194–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loeb, S.: 1990, ‘A Code of Ethics for Academic Accountants?’, Journal of Accounting Education 5(1) (Spring), 123–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loeb, S.: 1994, ‘Accounting Academic Ethics: A Code is Needed’, Issues in Accounting Education 9(1) (Spring), 191–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, M.: 1977, ‘Publication Prejudices: An Experimental Study of Confirmatory Bias in the Peer Review System’, Cognitive Therapy and Research 1(2), 161–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markland, R.: 1989, ‘Musings of a Well-travelled Editor’, Decision Sciences 20(4), vii–xiii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, P., J. Steagall and M. Fabritius: 1992, ‘Publication Delays in Articles in Economics: What to Do about Them’, Applied Economics 24(8) (August), 859–874

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D., L. Trevino and K. Butterfield: 1996, ‘The Influence of Collegiate and Corporate Codes of Conduct on Ethics-related Behavior in the Workplace’, Business Ethics Quarterly 6(4), 461–476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, D. and S. Ceci: 1982, ‘Peer-review Practices of Psychological Journals: The Fate of Published Articles, Submitted Again’, The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 5(2), 187–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pressman, S.: 1994, ‘Simultaneous Multiple Journal Submissions: The Case Against’, American Journal of Economics and Sociology 53(3) ( July), 316–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sasser, M. and A. Yankauer: 1993, ‘Prior, Duplicate, Repetitive, Fragmented, and Redundant Publication and Editorial Decision’, American Journal of Public Health 83(6) (June), 792–793.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serebnick, J.: 1991, ‘Identifying Unethical Practices in Journal Publishing’, Library Trends 40(2) (Fall), 357–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serebnick, J. and S. Harter: 1990, ‘Ethical Practices in Journal Publishing: A Study of Library and Information Science Periodicals’, Library Quarterly 60(2) (April), 91–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherrell, D., J. Hair and M. Griffin: 1989, ‘Marketing Academicians' Perceptions of Ethical Research and Publishing Behavior’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 17(4) (Fall), 315–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stryker, S.: 1990, ‘Ethical Issues in Editing Scholarly Journals’, The American Sociologist 21(1), 84–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szenberg, M.: 1994, ‘Disseminating Scholarly Output: The Case for Eliminating the Exclusivity of Journal Submissions’, American Journal of Economics and Sociology 53(3) (July), 303–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, R. and M. Vargo: 1994, The Author's Guide to Accounting and Financial Reporting Publications(West Publishing Company, St. Paul, MN).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Borkowski, S.C., Welsh, M.J. Ethical Practice in the Accounting Publishing Process: Contrasting Opinions of Authors and Editors. Journal of Business Ethics 25, 15–31 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005939128790

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005939128790

Keywords

Navigation