Presents a response to a letter to the editor about price-level restated accounting and the measurement of inflation gains and losses, published in this issue of the periodical.
This article discusses the nature of the demand for doctorate degrees in the field of accounting. Data were reported on several postulated underlying determinants of the demand for doctorates in accounting followed by data indicative of the underlying nature of the demand. With respect to the future demand for doctorates in accounting one feels that the determinants reported on here suggest that the demand will be somewhat higher than that forecasted by the 1972-73 Committees on Future Professorial Supply and Demand Further, one would expect to see the highest demand come from those schools seeking to develop Master's programs and those schools seeking AACSB accreditation on the undergraduate and graduate levels for the first time. The nature of the demand continues to focus on traditional subject areas with a secondary emphasis on the quantitative and information system specialization. Assuming possession of the doctorate, the appropriate theoretical education and teaching capability appear to be the essential qualities sought by recruiters. The importance of practical experience should not be underestimated.
Presents a response to a letter to the editor regarding the role of behavioral measures in accounting for human resources, published in this issue of the periodical.
This article presents response of the author on the comments made by scholar C.G. Hoskins on the paper "Theory Versus Practice in Risk Analysis: An Empirical Study," that was published in the July 1974 of the periodical "The Accounting Review." The comment by Hoskins represents a significant advance in modeling actual decision processes. However, one must add that Hoskins' findings support rather than dispute the conclusion of the original study that there appears to be substantial conflict between the decision processes used by actual decision makers and existing utility theory. The author's intentions in writing this response are to demonstrate why this is so and to expand further on the Hoskins model. It was restated that the model in the original study was not designed to produce decisions, which closely paralleled actual decisions. Rather, the model was built in the shape of classical utility theory with parameters, which were computed from an explicit statement by the firms as to their attitude toward risk-taking. The principal conclusion of the original research was that actual decisions are inconsistent with such a model.
Discusses a possible use of Human Resource Accounting for tax purposes in a service-related firm. Method of optimizing the distribution earnings in a closely held corporation; Standard format for determining the reasonable working capital needs for a corporation; Application of the mathematical Bardahl formula in the case Simons-Eastern Co. v. U.S.; Human Resource formula for service organizations.
Presents a reply to Vickrey's comment on the study on the additivity of current cash equivalent. Rejection of the possibility that CCE could be defined as numerosity; Argument that purchasing power is nonadditive; Recommendations for future research.
This article presents information on a study that provided insights into the organizational set prestige ranking. In this article, the authors examined the ramifications of an organizational set prestige ranking. It was found that 86% of the top twenty accounting department faculty members obtained their doctoral degrees from top twenty departments and that only slightly less than 4% of the Ph.D. graduates of non top twenty departments presently occupy faculty positions in the top twenty. When comparing the top five departments to the remaining top twenty departments, it was found that the top five hire their own graduates more frequently and employ on their faculties a greater proportion of other top five doctoral graduates than do the remaining members of the top twenty. These findings were found to be remarkably similar to those of scholar George R. Gross' earlier study of sociology departments. It will be interesting to observe whether any changes in these hiring practices will occur as a result of the continually increasing imbalance in the supply of and demand for accounting doctoral graduates.
This article presents response of the author on comments made by scholar Shu Liao on the paper "An Intra-Industry Comparison of Alternative Income Concepts and Relative Performance Evaluations" that was published in the October 1974 of the periodical "The Accounting Review." Liao examines the research methodology in three sections--statistical methods, components of income, and test of impact. First, however, it is pointed out that some of his statements might be interpreted to be full quotes of the study when, in fact, they are not. For example, in the second sentence of his note, he states the authors have concluded that each income concept could be used as a surrogate for other concepts. The statement is that, in many instances, each income concept could be used as a surrogate for the other concepts. The degree of agreement among different income concepts as a result of statistical tests is shown in each cell. He has made valuable suggestions for a number of extensions and for different approaches to studying the practical impact of alternative income concepts.
This article presents a study conducted to compare published accounting research and qualities of accounting faculty and doctoral programs. Recently, two studies have been published in which accounting departments were ranked according to some perceived criterion of excellence. Neither of these studies described the criterion of excellence to be utilized in the development of the rankings; rather they allowed the respondents to use their own subjective criteria. Objective criteria would be preferable as a basis for assessing the quality of the various accounting departments. One such criterion is the amount of research which is attributable to each department, and an indicator of research output is the number of articles published in the accounting journals. The results of this study are subject to several limitations. The study only analyzed the research which has been published in four accounting journals, one of which is published by the University of Chicago. No attempt was made to evaluate the effect of differences in the sizes of accounting faculties or doctoral programs.