What is it about?

The rising incidence of co-authorship in academia generally is well documented. Research collaboration has been argued to bring some specific benefits to researchers, yet the process and outcomes of collaboration is not without its risks and challenges. The crucial decision to collaborate has both short and long-term implications for the research agenda of most academics, yet relatively little evidence-based reflection on co-authorship is to be found in either the general academic or accounting literature. The aim of this paper is therefore to provide foundational insights into accounting journal article co-authorship, including the diversity and commonality of its processes, and their conditioning contexts. Based on interviews with 76 academics from 67 universities in the US, UK, mainland Europe and Australasia, who, in the 2011 calendar year, published their research in seven internationally esteemed accounting research journals, our findings point to productivity or social predilections of researchers driving their decision to co-author, as well as in their evaluation of the benefits and costs they have experienced in co-authoring. Interpreted from the vantage point of Social Exchange Theory, these findings lead to a broad classification of co-authorship styles, each with implications for both early career researchers as well as more experienced academics, in terms of the propensity to foster more satisfactory working relationships, and effectiveness of research outcomes.

Featured Image

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: With a little help from our friends: An empirical investigation of co-authoring in accounting research, The British Accounting Review, June 2016, Elsevier,
DOI: 10.1016/j.bar.2015.10.001.
You can read the full text:



The following have contributed to this page