Description
The purposes of this paper are to highlight those topics of forensic accounting that have
received little or no attention in the forensic accounting research that has been published in forensic
accounting research journals; discover what research methods have been most commonly used; and
identify research methods that have been infrequently used.
Accounting Research Journal
Topics and methods in forensic accounting research
J ames A. DiGabriele Wm. Dennis Huber
Article information:
To cite this document:
J ames A. DiGabriele Wm. Dennis Huber , (2015),"Topics and methods in forensic accounting
research", Accounting Research J ournal, Vol. 28 Iss 1 pp. 98 - 114
Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ARJ -08-2014-0071
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 21:21 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 23 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 855 times since 2015*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Timothy J . Louwers, (2015),"The past, present, and future (?) of crime-related forensic accounting
methodology", Accounting Research J ournal, Vol. 28 Iss 1 pp. 4-9http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/
ARJ -04-2015-0047
Paul Andon, Clinton Free, Benjamin Scard, (2015),"Pathways to accountant fraud: Australian
evidence and analysis", Accounting Research J ournal, Vol. 28 Iss 1 pp. 10-44 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/ARJ -06-2014-0058
Oluwatoyin Muse J ohnson Popoola, Ayoib B Che-Ahmad, Rose Shamsiah Samsudin, (2015),"An
empirical investigation of fraud risk assessment and knowledge requirement on fraud related
problem representation in Nigeria", Accounting Research J ournal, Vol. 28 Iss 1 pp. 78-97 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/ARJ -08-2014-0067
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:115632 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
*Related content and download information correct at time of
download.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Topics and methods in forensic
accounting research
James A. DiGabriele
Department of Accounting, Law & Taxation, School of Business,
Montclair State University, Montclair, New Jersey, USA, and
Wm. Dennis Huber
School of Business and Technology, Capella University, Minneapolis,
Minnesota, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purposes of this paper are to highlight those topics of forensic accounting that have
received little or no attention in the forensic accounting research that has been published in forensic
accounting research journals; discover what research methods have been most commonly used; and
identify research methods that have been infrequently used.
Design/methodology/approach – This is a descriptive research study that explores the topics and
methods used in forensic accounting research published in forensic accounting journals.
Findings – Fraud and quantitative methods make up the largest percentage of topics and research
methods published in forensic accounting journals.
Research limitations/implications – Limited to forensic accounting journals. Results suggest
forensic accounting researchers are using mimetic topics and methods of accounting research. The
absence of diversity in forensic accounting research topics and methods has the potential to
compromise the overall contribution of forensic accounting research.
Practical implications – This paper identifes gaps in topics and research methods in forensic
accounting research to encourage research in diverse topics using diverse methods that will be valuable
to forensic accountants.
Originality/value – This original research is the frst to survey and classify research published in
forensic accounting journals according to topic and method.
Keywords Forensic accounting, Research topics, Research methods
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Huber and DiGabriele (2014) have recognized that examining the topics and research
methods used in forensic accounting research can identify gaps that exist in forensic
accounting research. The purpose of this paper is to examine the topics and research
methods that have been published in forensic accounting journals.
Crumbley et al. (2013) identifed some of the more salient areas of forensic accounting
that include fraud (deterrence, prevention and investigation) and litigation support
services (economic and commercial damages, business valuation, bankruptcy, breach of
contract, shareholder/member disputes and merger and acquisition disputes), among
others. Research methods include both quantitative (including archival, survey,
behavioral and forecasting, among others) and qualitative (interviews, historical and
case studies/instructional, among others).
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1030-9616.htm
ARJ
28,1
98
Received20 August 2014
Revised20 August 2014
Accepted14 October 2014
Accounting Research Journal
Vol. 28 No. 1, 2015
pp. 98-114
©Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1030-9616
DOI 10.1108/ARJ-08-2014-0071
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Results reveal that certain topics have received more attention than others, while
others have been neglected altogether. Similarly, certain research methods have been
used more frequently than others and other methods have been ignored.
2. Importance and contribution
The purposes of this paper are to highlight those topics of forensic accounting that have
received little or no attention in the forensic accounting literature that has been
published in forensic accounting research journals; discover what research methods
have been most commonly used; and identify research methods that have been
infrequently used. The importance and contribution of this paper, therefore, are to
encourage research in a broader range of topics important to forensic accountants[1],
both nationally (USA) and internationally. The results of this paper can serve as a guide
to encourage relevant and signifcant contribution for future forensic accounting
research.
Only one study by Stone and Miller (2013) has been published about topics and
research methods used in forensic accounting research, but as discussed below, that
study was limited frst to topics and research methods used in forensic accounting
research published in American Accounting Association journals and further limited to
the topic of fraud. This study is the frst to examine the topics and research methods
used in forensic accounting research that has been published in the dedicated forensic
accounting journals with the aimof establishing newdirections for forensic accounting
research that will be useful to forensic accountants. This paper can provide the basis for
establishing new directions in forensic accounting research.
To place forensic accounting research topics and methods in context, we frst review
briefy the literature on topics and research methods used in accounting research and
accounting research journals. Then, following a discussion of the defnition of forensic
accounting, we survey the dedicated forensic accounting journals. This survey is
followed by an examination of the topics and methods used in forensic accounting
research published in forensic accounting journals. Next is a discussion of the results
and their implications. Recommendations for future research are given.
3. Literature review
The Accounting Review is considered an “elite journal” along with Contemporary
Accounting Research, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Journal of Accounting
Research and Journal of Accounting and Economics. Although “the scope of acceptable
articles should embrace any research methodology and any accounting-related subject
[…] [it] is also open to all rigorous research methods” (AAA, 2013c), for the period from
2008 to 2010, 1,249 papers were submitted. Out of those, 933 (10 per cent) were
empirical-archival, which resulted in 65 per cent of the 175 papers accepted for
publication. Twenty-four (17 per cent) of the 175 papers accepted for publication were
experimental, and 18 (13 per cent) were analytical. Thirty survey papers were
submitted, with six (4 per cent) accepted. Fifteen feld and case studies were submitted,
with 2 (1 per cent) accepted for publication. (Kachelmeier, 2009, 2012; Kaplan, 2011).
Heck and Jensen (2007) concluded that “The Accounting Review evolved into a
journal that is “incomprehensible” and, thus, of little interest to practitioners and many
accounting educators”. A survey by Inanga and Schneider (2005) found that academic
99
Forensic
accounting
research
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
research is not useful to practitioners. Inanga and Schneider’s fndings were supported
by Huber’s (2014) study of the accounting research-publication complex.
Merchant (2008, p. 901) observed that:
[…] in the USA, accounting research using economics-based paradigms, theories […] and
using either analytical research methods or analysis of large samples of archival (“objective”)
data are the dominate research methods.
The domination of these research methods “limits the type of research questions posed,
the research method and the subsequent insights gained from accounting research”
(Moerman, 2010). Young (2009) examined papers published in Auditing: A Journal of
Practice & Theory between 1992 and 2007 and found that out of 313 papers published
between 1992 and 2007, 85.6 per cent involved statistical causal analysis and modeling.
Previously, Brown (1996) surveyed 123 papers published in 17 accounting journals from
1976 to 1992. Seven research “paradigms” were used: capital markets, forecasting,
positive theory, accounting history accounting theory, behavior and agency. This
ascension of empirical/archival research has been referred to as methodolotry (Janesick,
2000; Yuille, 2013)[2].
Thus, with the topics and methods of accounting research to provide context, we now
examine forensic accounting and consider how similar to, or different from, forensic
accounting research is to accounting research for the purpose of discovering what topics
and methods have been used in forensic accounting research and what gaps may exist
in forensic accounting research.
4. Defnition of forensic accounting
Forensic accounting is often equated with fraud examination or fraud auditing.
However, as Crumbley (2009) points out, “forensic accounting is a challenging discipline
that substantially interacts with auditing, economics, fnance, information systems, and
law”.
Huber and DiGabriele (2014) have given the most comprehensive defnition of
forensic accounting as:
[…] a multidisciplinary feld that encompasses both a profession and an industry, where civil
or criminal economic and fnancial claims, whether business or personal, are contested within
established political structures, recognized and accepted social parameters, and well-defned
legal jurisdictions, and informed by the theories, methods, and procedures from the felds of
law, auditing, accounting, fnance, economics, psychology, sociology, and criminology.
As a multidisciplinary feld, it is both appropriate and necessary that forensic
accounting research be conducted in all aspects of the felds and disciplines contributing
to and informing the feld of forensic accounting. Furthermore, research in forensic
accounting would be expected to use all research methods customarily used in the
disciplines contributing to the feld of forensic accounting. This paper investigates
whether forensic accounting research actually includes the diversity of topics that
inform the feld of forensic accounting, and whether it uses all research methods
customarily used in the disciplines contributing to the feld of forensic accounting.
5. Forensic accounting research journals
There are currently two dedicated forensic accounting research journals – the Journal of
Forensic & Investigative Accounting (JFIA) and the Journal of Forensic Studies in
ARJ
28,1
100
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Accounting and Business (JFSAB). The JFIA began publishing in 2009 and the JFSAB
began publishing in 2009. The Journal of Forensic Accounting (formally The Journal of
Forensic Accounting: Auditing, Fraud &Risk, JFA) began publishing in 2000 and ceased
publishing in 2008. The American Accounting Association’s section on Forensic
Accounting is scheduled to publish its frst issue of the Journal of Forensic Accounting
Research (JFAR) beginning in 2015.
There are many accounting journals that occasionally publish research in forensic
accounting but mostly research that is limited to fraud. For example, The Accounting
Review; Contemporary Accounting Research; Accounting, Organizations and Society;
Journal of Accounting Research; Journal of Accounting and Economics; Journal of
Accounting Literature; Reviewof Accounting Studies; the British Accounting Review; the
Accounting Research Journal; Journal of Accounting and Public Policy; Journal
of Accounting, Ethics and Public Policy; Research in Accounting Regulation;
International Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Performance Evaluation; the Journal
of Business Ethics; and the Pacifc Accounting Review have all published research in
forensic accounting. However, these are not dedicated forensic accounting journals and,
except for occasional special issues, the overwhelming majority of papers are limited to
different aspects of fraud and some special issues dedicated to fraud[3]. Forensic
accounting encompasses a much broader area than just fraud.
In addition to the academic journals there are practitioner journals, such as the
Journal of Accountancy, that occasionally publish articles related to forensic accounting.
Furthermore, forensic accounting certifcation corporations[4] publish their own
journals. The Association of Certifed Fraud Examiners publishes the Fraud Examiner.
The National Association of Certifed Valuators and Analysts publishes The Value
Examiner. The Forensic Examiner is published by American College of Forensic
Examiners Institute.
Only research published in the non-corporate-owned dedicated forensic accounting
journals, the JFIA, the JFSAB and the JFA, is considered here[5]. While most papers
published in forensic accounting journals focus on forensic accounting in the USA, the
JFIA also publishes forensic accounting research from an international perspective.
6. Method and results
6.1 Method
We analyzed and classifed 366 papers published in JFA, JFIA, and JFSABbetween 2000
and 2014 based on title, keywords and/or abstracts. Not all papers had keywords or
abstracts available. Thus, some were judgment calls and some topics of some papers
overlapped (e.g. Fraud and Education). In that case, the predominant topic was used to
classify the paper.
Topics were classifed as Fraud, ForensicAccounting/Practice, Education, Ethics,
Valuation and Other. “ForensicAccounting/Practice” included litigation support
services such as expert witnessing, matrimonial and bankruptcy. “Other” included
internal audit, earnings management and fnancial reporting.
Research methods were classifed as Quantitative (Archival, Experimental, Survey,
Other) and Qualitative (Case Study, Qualitative Discourse, Interview/Focus Groups,
Other), Theoretical, Behavioral, Historical and Instructional.
101
Forensic
accounting
research
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
6.2 Results
The results of this study have revealed interesting and important insights into the
nature of forensic accounting research. Considering topics frst, fraud made up 165 (45.1
per cent) of all papers published in all journals with all methods. Within fraud,
Quantitative Archival included 35 papers (9.6 per cent) of all papers published. Forensic
Accounting/Practice consistedof 94 papers (25.7 per cent), withInstructional methods at
15 per cent. Other was third with 42 papers (11.5 per cent).
Quantitative Archival was the most frequently used method with 31 papers (8.5 per
cent). Education was third, with 36 papers (9.8 per cent). Ethics was ffth with 23 papers
(6.3 per cent) and last was Valuation.
Turning to Research methods, the top two were Instructional methods which made
up 97 papers (26.5 per cent) and Quantitative Archival which made up 88 papers (24 per
cent) of all papers across all topics. Together Instructional and Quantitative Archival
accounted for more than 50 per cent of all methods. In the Education topic area, case
studies were the dominant method (6.6 per cent) (Tables I-VI).
7. Discussion and implications
Obviously, as with accounting research, fraud is the “topic of choice” for the majority of
papers published in forensic accounting journals. While it is less than half (45.1 per cent)
of all papers, the other 55.9 per cent is dispersed across fve other topics. Furthermore,
Quantitative Archival methods made up 21.2 per cent of all fraud methods. All
quantitative methods comprise 39.1 per cent of all methods, with the remaining 61.9 per
cent spread out over the 10 other methods.
These percentages mirror Stone and Miller’s (2013) fndings. Stone and Miller
examined 92 papers published in 9 American Accounting Association journals between
January 2000 and September 2011 according to six areas: audit, fnancial, systems,
managerial, tax and international. They found that audit accounted for 63 per cent of the
papers. In addition, 73.9 per cent of the total used quantitative methods, while 26.1 per
cent used qualitative methods”.
When we consider the results of this survey of forensic accounting research with the
fndings of Stone and Miller, Heck and Jensen (2007 – 99 per cent of all papers published
in The Accounting Review between 1986 and 2005 “contained complex mathematical
equations and multivariate statistical analyses of a narrowsubset of topics amenable to
analysis using mathematics, management science, econometrics and psychometrics”)
and Young (2009 – “85.6 per cent out of 313 articles published between 1992 and 2007 in
Auditing – A Journal of Practice and Theory involved statistical causal analysis and
modeling”), a trend appears to have emerged that should concern both forensic
accountants and forensic accounting researchers.
A signifcant outcome of this study shows the obvious dearth of manuscripts on
valuation topics, one of the major topics of forensic accounting. Valuation is typically
driven by practice, and this indicator should motivate more valuation research in the
forensic accounting feld. Similarly, other topics driven by practice but ignored in the
published forensic research include damages and fnancial issues in domestic relations,
among others, all of which deserve greater attention in forensic accounting research.
The results of this study strongly suggest that forensic accounting researchers are
attempting to emulate the topics and methods used in accounting research journals,
particularly the “elite” journals. Both methodolotry and methodocracy are asserting
ARJ
28,1
102
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Table I.
Total summary
Topic Method JFSAB JFA JFIA
Total
topic
Total
method
%
topic
%
method
Fraud 165 45.1
QuanSurvey 3 10 8 21 5.7
CSQual 2 9 4 15 4.1
QuanArch 2 9 24 35 9.6
QuanExper – 5 8 13 3.6
CDQ – 19 8 27 7.4
Instructional – 16 12 28 7.7
Historical – – 1 1 0.3
Theorectical – 5 6 11 3.0
IFGQual – 1 2 3 0.8
OtherQual – – 2 2 0.5
Other – – 9 9 2.5
Total 7 74 84 165 165 45.1 45.1
ForensicAccounting/
Practice
94 25.7
QuanSurvey – 1 4 5 1.4
CSQual – 6 3 9 2.5
QuanArch – 7 8 15 4.1
QaunExper – – 1 1 0.3
CDQ – 7 2 9 2.5
Instructional 6 33 16 55 15.0
Historical – – – – 0.0
Theorectical – – – – 0.0
IFGQual – – – – 0.0
OtherQual – – – – 0.0
Other – – – – 0.0
Total 6 54 34 94 94 25.7 25.7
Education 36 9.8
QuanSurvey – 1 1 2 0.5
CSQual 8 7 9 24 6.6
QuanArch – – – – 0.0
QuanExp 2 – 1 3 0.8
CDQ 1 – 1 2 0.5
Instructional – 2 – 2 0.5
Historical 1 2 – 3 0.8
Theorectical – – – – 0.0
IFGQual – – – – 0.0
OtherQual – – – – 0.0
Other – – – – 0.0
Total 12 12 12 36 36 9.8 9.8
(continued)
103
Forensic
accounting
research
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
themselves into forensic accounting research. This trend is a cause for concern, as
practitioners do not fnd research published in academic journals to be useful (Inanga
and Schneider, 2005; Huber, 2014). The greater concern, however, is because “forensic”
is inherently integrated with, and inseparable from, legal processes (see defnition
Table I.
Topic Method JFSAB JFA JFIA
Total
topic
Total
method
%
topic
%
method
Ethics 23 6.3
QuanSurvey 1 1 1 3 0.8
CSQaul – 2 2 4 1.1
QuanArch – 2 – 2 0.5
QuanExp – 2 3 5 1.4
CDQ 1 3 3 7 1.9
Instructional 1 1 – 2 0.5
Historical – – – – 0.0
Theorectical – – – – 0.0
IFGQual – – – – 0.0
OtherQual – – – – 0.0
Other – – – – 0.0
Total 3 11 9 23 23 6.3 6.3
Valuation 6 1.6
QuanSurvey – – – 0.0
CSQual – – – 0.0
QuanArch – 5 – 5 1.4
QuanExper – – – – 0.0
CDQ – – – – 0.0
Instructional – 1 1 0.3
Historical – – – – 0.0
Theorectical – – – – 0.0
IFGQual – – – – 0.0
OtherQual – – – – 0.0
Other – – – – 0.0
Total – 6 – 6 6 1.6 1.6
Other 42 11.5
QuanSurvey – – – – 0.0
CSQual – – – – 0.0
QuanArch – 30 1 31 8.5
QuanExper – 1 1 2 0.5
CDQ – – – – 0.0
Instructional – 9 9 2.5
Historical – – – – 0.0
Theorectical – – – – 0.0
IFGQual – – – – 0.0
OtherQual – – – – 0.0
Other – – – – 0.0
Total – 40 1 42 42 11.5 11.5
Grand Total 28 197 140 366 366 100.0 100.0
ARJ
28,1
104
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
above), and thus forensic accountants may be deprived of valuable research that could
potentially be used to resolve contested fnancial and economic claims in a just manner.
8. Conclusion and recommendations
The purpose of this paper is to identify gaps in topics of research and research methods
in forensic accounting literature. The results show that there are several gaps in both
topics and research methods that need to be addressed. To be useful to practitioners,
research in forensic accounting should be expanded to cover all topics that fall within
the canopy of “forensic accounting”. Likewise, forensic accounting researchers should
use more types of research methods than those currently used, so forensic accounting
research can be subject to the full spectrum of research methods.
Forensic accounting is a confuence of many different disciplines such as law,
auditing, accounting, fnance, economics, psychology, sociology and criminology. As a
consequence, forensic accounting research should embrace the diversity of topics.
Similarly, social science research regularly uses qualitative methods such as: narrative
inquiry, research interviews (structured/unstructured), content analysis, focus groups
Table II.
Total method by
total topic
Topic Fraud
Forensic Accounting/
Practice Education Ethics Valuation Other Total
%
Total
QuanSurvey 21 5 2 3 – – 31 8.5
CSQual 15 9 24 4 – – 52 14.2
QuanArch 35 15 – 2 5 31 88 24.0
QuanExper 13 1 3 5 – 2 24 6.6
CDQ 27 9 2 7 – – 45 12.3
Instructional 28 55 2 2 1 9 97 26.5
Historical 1 – – – – – 1 0.3
Theorectical 11 – 3 – – – 14 3.8
IFGQual 3 – – – – 3 0.8
OtherQual 2 – – – – – 2 0.5
Other 9 – – – – – 9 2.5
Total 165 94 36 23 6 42 366 100.0
Table III.
Key
Classifcations Quantitative/empirical Qualitative
Archival QuanArch
Experimental QuanExper
Survey Quan Survey
Other QuanOth
Case study CSQual
Qualitative discourse CDQ
Interview/focus groups IFGQaul
Other OthQaul
Theoretical
Behavioral
Historical
Instructional
105
Forensic
accounting
research
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Table IV.
Journal of Forensic
Studies in
Accounting and
Business
Topic Method 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Total
topic
Total
method
Fraud 7
QuanSurvey 1 – 1 – 1 3
CSQual – 1 1 – – 2
QuanArch – – 1 – 1 2
QuanExper – – – – – –
CDQ – – – – – –
Instructional – – – – – –
Historical – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – –
Other – – – – – –
Total 1 1 3 – 2 7 7
ForensicAccounting/
Practice
6
QuanSurvey – – – – – –
CSQual – – – – – –
QuanArch – – – – – –
QaunExper – – – – – –
CDQ – – – – – –
Instructional 5 – – – 1 6
Historical – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – –
Other – – – – – –
Total 5 – – – 1 6 2
Education 12
QuanSurvey – – – – – –
CSQual 1 4 1 – 2 8
QuanArch –
QuanExp 1 1 – – – 2
CDQ 1 – – – – 1
Instructional – – – – – –
Historical 1 – – – – 1
Theorectical – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – –
Other – – – – – –
Total 4 5 1 – 2 12 12
(continued)
ARJ
28,1
106
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Table IV.
Topic Method 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Total
topic
Total
method
Ethics 2
QuanSurvey – – – – –
CSQaul – – – – – –
QuanArch – – – – – –
QuanExp – – – – – –
CDQ – – – – 1 1
Instructional – – 1 – – 1
Historical – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – –
Other – – – – – –
Total – – 1 – 1 2 2
Valuation –
QuanSurvey – – – – – –
CSQual – – – – – –
QuanArch – – – – – –
QuanExper – – – – – –
CDQ – – – – – –
Instructional – – – – – –
Historical – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – –
Other – – – – – –
Total – – – – – – –
Other –
QuanSurvey – – – – – –
CSQual – – – – – –
QuanArch – – – – – –
QuanExper – – – – – –
CDQ – – – – – –
Instructional – – – – – –
Historical – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – –
Other – – – – – –
Total – – – – – – –
Grand Total 10 6 5 – 6 27 27
107
Forensic
accounting
research
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Table V.
Journal of Forensic &
Investigative
Accounting
Topic Method 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Total
topic
Total
method
Fraud 84
QuanSurvey 2 2 1 1 2 – 8
CSQual 1 1 1 1 – – 4
QuanArch 6 9 4 2 2 1 24
QuanExper 1 3 1 2 1 8
CDQ 1 3 1 – 3 – 8
Instructional 4 2 3 2 – 1 12
Historical 1 – – – – – 1
Theorectical – – 1 2 2 1 6
IFGQual – – – 2 – 2
OtherQual – – – – – 2 2
Other 1 3 3 – 2 9
Total 17 20 17 11 11 8 84 84
ForensicAccounting/
Practice
34
QuanSurvey 1 – 1 1 1 – 4
CSQual – – 1 1 1 – 3
QuanArch 1 3 1 1 1 1 8
QaunExper – 1 – – – 1
CDQ – – 1 1 – – 2
Instructional – 5 3 2 3 3 16
Historical – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – –
Total 2 9 7 6 6 4 34 34
Education 12
QuanSurvey – 1 – – – 1
CSQual 1 – 5 – – 3 9
QuanArch – – – – – – –
QuanExp – – – 1 – 1
CDQ – – – – – 1 1
Instructional – – – – – – –
Historical – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – –
Total 1 1 5 1 – 4 12 12
(continued)
ARJ
28,1
108
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Table V.
Topic Method 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Total
topic
Total
method
Ethics 9
QuanSurvey – – 1 – – – 1
CSQaul – – – – – 2 2
QuanArch – – – – – – –
QuanExp – – 1 – 1 1 3
CDQ – – – 1 – 2 3
Instructional – – – – – – –
Historical – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – –
Total – – 2 1 1 5 9 9
Valuation –
QuanSurvey – – – – – – –
CSQual – – – – – – –
QuanArch – – – – – – –
QuanExper – – – – – – –
CDQ – – – – – – –
Instructional – – – – – – –
Historical – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – –
Total – – – – – – – –
Other 2
QuanSurvey – – – – – – –
CSQual – – – – – – –
QuanArch – – – 1 – – 1
QuanExper – – – 1 – – 1
CDQ – – – – – – –
Instructional – – – – – – –
Historical – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – –
Total – – – 2 – – 2 2
Grand total 20 30 31 21 18 21 141 141
109
Forensic
accounting
research
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Table VI.
Journal of Forensic
Accounting
Topic Method 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Total
topic
Total
method
Fraud 74
QuanSurvey 2 – – 1 – 1 5 1 – 10
CSQual 1 3 1 1 1 – – 1 1 9
QuanArch 2 2 1 1 2 – 1 9
QuanExper 1 – – – 2 1 – 1 – 5
CDQ 2 – – 3 3 2 3 3 3 19
Instructional 1 – 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 16
Historical – – – – – – – – – –
Theorectical – 1 – – 1 1 1 – 1 5
IFGQual – – – – 1 – – – – 1
OtherQual – – – – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – – – –
Total 9 6 4 9 12 10 10 8 6 74 74
ForensicAccounting/
Practice
6
QuanSurvey – – 1 – – – – – – 1
CSQual – 1 2 1 2 – – – – 6
QuanArch 1 1 – – – – 3 2 – 7
QaunExper – – – – – – – – –
CDQ – – 1 1 2 1 2 – – 7
Instructional 1 – 6 6 9 4 2 4 1 33
Historical – – – – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – – – –
Total – 2 10 8 13 5 7 6 1 6 54
12 –
Education 12
QuanSurvey – – 1 – – – – – – 1
CSQual 1 1 1 – 1 1 1 – 1 7
QuanArch – – – – – – – – – –
QuanExp – – – – – – – – –
CDQ – – – – – – – – –
Instructional 1 – – – – – – 1 2
Historical – 1 – – – 1 – – – 2
Theorectical – – – – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – – – –
Total 2 2 2 – 1 2 1 1 1 12 12
(continued)
ARJ
28,1
110
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Table VI.
Topic Method 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Total
topic
Total
method
Ethics 11 –
QuanSurvey – – – – 1 – – – – 1
CSQaul – – – – – 1 1 – – 2
QuanArch – – – – – – 2 – – 2
QuanExp – – – – – – 1 1 – 2
CDQ – 1 – – 2 – – – 3
Instructional – – – – – 1 – – – 1
Historical – – – – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – – – –
Total – 1 – – 1 4 4 1 – 11 11
Valuation 6
QuanSurvey – – – – – – – – – –
CSQual – – – – – – – – – –
QuanArch – 1 – – 1 1 1 1 – 5
QuanExper – – – – – – – – – –
CDQ – – – – – – – – – –
Instructional – – – 1 – – – – – 1
Historical – – – – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – – – –
Total – 1 – 1 1 1 1 1 – 6 6
Other 40
QuanSurvey – – – – – – – – – –
CSQual – – – – – – – – – –
QuanArch – 4 7 5 4 2 3 4 1 30
QuanExper – – – – – – 1 – – 1
CDQ – – – – – – – – – –
Instructional – – – 1 – 2 1 3 2 9
Historical – – – – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – – – –
Total – 4 7 6 4 4 5 7 3 40 40
Grand Total 13 16 23 24 32 26 28 24 11 197 197
111
Forensic
accounting
research
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
and discourse analysis (Meyers, 2013), and research in forensic accounting should
likewise utilize all research tools and methods at their disposal.
Among other things, future research should investigate, in more detail, the types of
research published in forensic accounting journals and consider trends over time. This
research could reveal additional gaps in both topics and methods.
Notes
1. Here, “forensic accountants” refers to those who are engaged in the practice of forensic
accounting.
2. The reign of a particular method and methodology is a methodocracy (Ruth, 2007).
3. For example, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Volume 38, Issues 6-7, pages 407-558
(August-October 2013).
4. Forensic accounting certifcation corporations are corporations that issue certifcations in
forensic accounting related disciplines such as fraud examination and valuation.
5. See Appendix for the missions and scopes of the journals.
References
American Accounting Association (AAA) (2013c), The Accounting Review, available at: www.
allentrack.net/AAA/Editorial_Policies/ACCR.pdf
Brown, L.D. (1996), “Infuential accounting articles, individuals, Ph.D. granting institutions and
faculties: a citation analysis”, Accounting Organizations and Society, Vol. 21, pp. 723-754.
Crumbley, D.L. (2009), “So what is forensic accounting?”, The ABO Reporter, available at: http://
aaahq.org/abo/reporter/fall09/abo08.htm
Crumbley, D.L., Heitger, L E. and Smith, G.S. (2013), Forensic and Investigative Accounting, 6th
ed., CCH Group, Chicago, IL.
Heck, J.L. and Jensen, R.E. (2007), “An analysis of the evolution of research contributions by the
accounting review, 1926-2005”, The Accounting Historians Journal, Vol. 34 No. 2,
pp. 109-141.
Huber, W.D. (2014), “The research-publication complex and the construct shift in accounting
research”, International Journal of Critical Accounting, Vol. 6 No. 3.
Huber, W.D. and DiGabriele, J.A. (2014), “Research in forensic accounting – what matters?”,
Journal of Theoretical Accounting Research, Vol. 10 No. 1.
Inanga, E.L. and Schneider, W.B. (2005), “The failure of accounting research to improve
accounting practice: a problem of theory and lack of communication”, Critical Perspectives
on Accounting, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 227-248.
Janesick, V.A. (2000), “The choreography of qualitative research design”, in Denzin, N.A. and
Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks,
pp. 379-399.
JFA (2000), Journal of Forensic Accounting, Vol. 1 No. 1, p. 1.
JFA (2008), Journal of Forensic Accounting, Vol. 9 No. 1, p. 1.
JFSAB (2014), Journal of Forensic Studies in Accounting and Business, available at:http://coba.
georgiasouthern.edu/jfsab/.
Kachelmeier, S. (2009), “Annual report and editorial commentary for the accounting review”, The
Accounting Review, Vol. 84 No. 6, pp. 2047-2075.
ARJ
28,1
112
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Kachelmeier, S. (2012), “Accounting education using computers and multimedia”, available at:http://listserv.aaahq.org/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2?ind1204e&L?aecm&F?P&S?&P?30077
Kaplan, R. (2011), “Accounting scholarship that advances professional knowledge and practice”,
The Accounting Review, Vol. 86 No. 2, pp. 367-383.
Merchant, K.A. (2008), “Why interdisciplinary accounting research tends not to impact most
North American academic accountants”, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 19 No. 1,
pp. 901-908.
Meyers, M.D. (2013), Qualitative Research in Business and Management, Sage, London.
Moerman, L. (2010), “Accounting research and the sociology of knowledge”, Paper presented to
Sixth Asia Pacifc Interdisciplinary Research in Accounting Conference, Sydney, 12-13
July.
Ruth, S. (2007), “Methodocracy, misogyny, and bad faith: sexism in the philosophic
establishment”, Metaphilosophy, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 48-61.
Stone, D.N. and Miller, T.C. (2013), “The state of, and prospects for, forensic and fraud research
that matters”, Journal of Forensic & Investigative Accounting, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 35-76.
Young, J.J. (2009), “The absence of dissent”, Accounting and the Public Interest, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 1-9.
Yuille, J.C. (2013), “The challenge for forensic memory research: methodolotry”, in Cooper, B.S.,
Griesel, D. and Ternes, M. (Eds), Applied Issues in Investigative Interviewing, Eyewitness
Memory, and Credibility Assessment, Springer, Verlag, New York.
Further reading
JFIA (2014), Journal of Forensic & Investigative Accounting, available at: www.bus.lsu.
edu/accounting/faculty/lcrumbley/jfa/Default.htm.
Appendix A. Forensic accounting journals
Journal of Forensic Accounting
The Journal of Forensic Accounting: Auditing, Fraud &Taxation (JFA) is an important forum
for publication of forensic accounting research, striving to establish a balance between
theoretical and empirical studies. JFA considers papers on fraud and fraud auditing, risk
assessment, detection of earnings manipulation and tax evasion, bankruptcy studies, GAAP
violation, fnancial statement fraud, internal auditing, and the underground economy. In
addition, papers on particular techniques, technologies, and preventative controls are also
presented, and review articles of importance to forensic accountants are occasionally invited.
(JFA, 2000)
The Editorial Policy of the last issue published in June, 2008 stated the following:
The Journal of Forensic Accounting: Auditing, Fraud & Risk (JFA) is an independent
international forumfor the publication of research dealing with the models and methodologies
of investigative and forensic accounting, seeking to establish a balance between theoretical
and empirical studies, and striving to foster practitioner-academic dialogue and collaboration.
The focus of the journal is on the evidentiary nature of accounting data, and topics include
fraud and forensic auditing; compliance, due diligence, and risk assessment; detection of
fnancial statement misrepresentation and tax evasion; bankruptcy and valuation studies;
GAAP, GAAS and SEC violations; non-standard entries, structured transactions, and
earnings management (non-neutral fnancial reporting); discovery, custody, analysis, and
admissibility of economic evidence; fair presentation and disclosure transparency; audit
quality review and evaluation; transaction tracing, reconstruction, and accountability;
economic damage calculation; fnancial reporting systemabuses, vulnerabilities, and security;
113
Forensic
accounting
research
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
litigation support and dispute avoidance; extended procedures within the statutory audit;
money and information laundering; and the underground economy; among others. In addition,
papers on particular techniques and technologies, as well as preventative controls and
improved standards are invited. Submitted research should be grounded in real-world
business problems or litigation issues faced by practitioners and entity stakeholders
(JFA, 2008).
Journal of Forensic & Investigative Accounting
“The Journal of Forensic & Investigative Accounting (JFIA) publishes creative and innovative
studies using research methodologies that logically and clearly:
• identify, describe and illuminate important academic forensic accounting, fraud and
litigation services issues;
• tests and improves forensic accounting research skills, tools and techniques;
• stimulates discussion and experimentation in instructional means, methods and materials
in the feld of forensic accounting and research in general; and
• exchanges of ideas and fndings about developments related to instruction, learning and
curricular issues in forensic accounting and fraud education” (JFIA, 2014).
Journal of forensic studies in accounting and business
The Journal of Forensic Studies in Accounting and Business (JFSAB) is a refereed academic
journal that publishes basic research, applied, practice, and pedagogical papers in the areas of
fraud and forensic studies across the felds of business, economics and law (JFSAB, 2014).
About the authors
James A. DiGabriele, PhD/DPS, CPA/ABV/CFF, is a Professor of Accounting at Montclair State
University. His primary research focuses on, forensic accounting, private company valuation,
investigative accounting and auditing. His principal teaching areas are, Forensic Accounting,
Fraud Examination, Auditing and Financial Accounting. His articles have appeared in numerous
academic and professional journals including, Accounting Horizons, Critical Perspectives on
Accounting, Journal of Legal Economics, Journal of Forensic Accounting, Journal of Forensic &
Investigative Accounting, The CPAJournal, Journal of Accountancy, Journal of Business Valuation
& Economic Loss Analysis, Journal of Theoretical Accounting Research, and Issues in Accounting
Education.
Wm. Dennis Huber, JD, DBA, CPA, CFE, is a core Faculty Member at Capella University
School of Business and Technology. His research in forensic accounting and accounting history
has been published in the Journal of Forensic & Investigative Accounting; Research in Accounting
Regulation; International Journal of Critical Accounting; Journal of Accounting, Ethics and Public
Policy; Journal of Theoretical Accounting Research; and Journal of Accounting, Ethics and Public
Policy. Wm. Dennis Huber is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:
[email protected]
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]
ARJ
28,1
114
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
doc_166298640.pdf
The purposes of this paper are to highlight those topics of forensic accounting that have
received little or no attention in the forensic accounting research that has been published in forensic
accounting research journals; discover what research methods have been most commonly used; and
identify research methods that have been infrequently used.
Accounting Research Journal
Topics and methods in forensic accounting research
J ames A. DiGabriele Wm. Dennis Huber
Article information:
To cite this document:
J ames A. DiGabriele Wm. Dennis Huber , (2015),"Topics and methods in forensic accounting
research", Accounting Research J ournal, Vol. 28 Iss 1 pp. 98 - 114
Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ARJ -08-2014-0071
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 21:21 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 23 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 855 times since 2015*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Timothy J . Louwers, (2015),"The past, present, and future (?) of crime-related forensic accounting
methodology", Accounting Research J ournal, Vol. 28 Iss 1 pp. 4-9http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/
ARJ -04-2015-0047
Paul Andon, Clinton Free, Benjamin Scard, (2015),"Pathways to accountant fraud: Australian
evidence and analysis", Accounting Research J ournal, Vol. 28 Iss 1 pp. 10-44 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/ARJ -06-2014-0058
Oluwatoyin Muse J ohnson Popoola, Ayoib B Che-Ahmad, Rose Shamsiah Samsudin, (2015),"An
empirical investigation of fraud risk assessment and knowledge requirement on fraud related
problem representation in Nigeria", Accounting Research J ournal, Vol. 28 Iss 1 pp. 78-97 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/ARJ -08-2014-0067
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:115632 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
*Related content and download information correct at time of
download.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Topics and methods in forensic
accounting research
James A. DiGabriele
Department of Accounting, Law & Taxation, School of Business,
Montclair State University, Montclair, New Jersey, USA, and
Wm. Dennis Huber
School of Business and Technology, Capella University, Minneapolis,
Minnesota, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purposes of this paper are to highlight those topics of forensic accounting that have
received little or no attention in the forensic accounting research that has been published in forensic
accounting research journals; discover what research methods have been most commonly used; and
identify research methods that have been infrequently used.
Design/methodology/approach – This is a descriptive research study that explores the topics and
methods used in forensic accounting research published in forensic accounting journals.
Findings – Fraud and quantitative methods make up the largest percentage of topics and research
methods published in forensic accounting journals.
Research limitations/implications – Limited to forensic accounting journals. Results suggest
forensic accounting researchers are using mimetic topics and methods of accounting research. The
absence of diversity in forensic accounting research topics and methods has the potential to
compromise the overall contribution of forensic accounting research.
Practical implications – This paper identifes gaps in topics and research methods in forensic
accounting research to encourage research in diverse topics using diverse methods that will be valuable
to forensic accountants.
Originality/value – This original research is the frst to survey and classify research published in
forensic accounting journals according to topic and method.
Keywords Forensic accounting, Research topics, Research methods
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Huber and DiGabriele (2014) have recognized that examining the topics and research
methods used in forensic accounting research can identify gaps that exist in forensic
accounting research. The purpose of this paper is to examine the topics and research
methods that have been published in forensic accounting journals.
Crumbley et al. (2013) identifed some of the more salient areas of forensic accounting
that include fraud (deterrence, prevention and investigation) and litigation support
services (economic and commercial damages, business valuation, bankruptcy, breach of
contract, shareholder/member disputes and merger and acquisition disputes), among
others. Research methods include both quantitative (including archival, survey,
behavioral and forecasting, among others) and qualitative (interviews, historical and
case studies/instructional, among others).
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1030-9616.htm
ARJ
28,1
98
Received20 August 2014
Revised20 August 2014
Accepted14 October 2014
Accounting Research Journal
Vol. 28 No. 1, 2015
pp. 98-114
©Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1030-9616
DOI 10.1108/ARJ-08-2014-0071
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Results reveal that certain topics have received more attention than others, while
others have been neglected altogether. Similarly, certain research methods have been
used more frequently than others and other methods have been ignored.
2. Importance and contribution
The purposes of this paper are to highlight those topics of forensic accounting that have
received little or no attention in the forensic accounting literature that has been
published in forensic accounting research journals; discover what research methods
have been most commonly used; and identify research methods that have been
infrequently used. The importance and contribution of this paper, therefore, are to
encourage research in a broader range of topics important to forensic accountants[1],
both nationally (USA) and internationally. The results of this paper can serve as a guide
to encourage relevant and signifcant contribution for future forensic accounting
research.
Only one study by Stone and Miller (2013) has been published about topics and
research methods used in forensic accounting research, but as discussed below, that
study was limited frst to topics and research methods used in forensic accounting
research published in American Accounting Association journals and further limited to
the topic of fraud. This study is the frst to examine the topics and research methods
used in forensic accounting research that has been published in the dedicated forensic
accounting journals with the aimof establishing newdirections for forensic accounting
research that will be useful to forensic accountants. This paper can provide the basis for
establishing new directions in forensic accounting research.
To place forensic accounting research topics and methods in context, we frst review
briefy the literature on topics and research methods used in accounting research and
accounting research journals. Then, following a discussion of the defnition of forensic
accounting, we survey the dedicated forensic accounting journals. This survey is
followed by an examination of the topics and methods used in forensic accounting
research published in forensic accounting journals. Next is a discussion of the results
and their implications. Recommendations for future research are given.
3. Literature review
The Accounting Review is considered an “elite journal” along with Contemporary
Accounting Research, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Journal of Accounting
Research and Journal of Accounting and Economics. Although “the scope of acceptable
articles should embrace any research methodology and any accounting-related subject
[…] [it] is also open to all rigorous research methods” (AAA, 2013c), for the period from
2008 to 2010, 1,249 papers were submitted. Out of those, 933 (10 per cent) were
empirical-archival, which resulted in 65 per cent of the 175 papers accepted for
publication. Twenty-four (17 per cent) of the 175 papers accepted for publication were
experimental, and 18 (13 per cent) were analytical. Thirty survey papers were
submitted, with six (4 per cent) accepted. Fifteen feld and case studies were submitted,
with 2 (1 per cent) accepted for publication. (Kachelmeier, 2009, 2012; Kaplan, 2011).
Heck and Jensen (2007) concluded that “The Accounting Review evolved into a
journal that is “incomprehensible” and, thus, of little interest to practitioners and many
accounting educators”. A survey by Inanga and Schneider (2005) found that academic
99
Forensic
accounting
research
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
research is not useful to practitioners. Inanga and Schneider’s fndings were supported
by Huber’s (2014) study of the accounting research-publication complex.
Merchant (2008, p. 901) observed that:
[…] in the USA, accounting research using economics-based paradigms, theories […] and
using either analytical research methods or analysis of large samples of archival (“objective”)
data are the dominate research methods.
The domination of these research methods “limits the type of research questions posed,
the research method and the subsequent insights gained from accounting research”
(Moerman, 2010). Young (2009) examined papers published in Auditing: A Journal of
Practice & Theory between 1992 and 2007 and found that out of 313 papers published
between 1992 and 2007, 85.6 per cent involved statistical causal analysis and modeling.
Previously, Brown (1996) surveyed 123 papers published in 17 accounting journals from
1976 to 1992. Seven research “paradigms” were used: capital markets, forecasting,
positive theory, accounting history accounting theory, behavior and agency. This
ascension of empirical/archival research has been referred to as methodolotry (Janesick,
2000; Yuille, 2013)[2].
Thus, with the topics and methods of accounting research to provide context, we now
examine forensic accounting and consider how similar to, or different from, forensic
accounting research is to accounting research for the purpose of discovering what topics
and methods have been used in forensic accounting research and what gaps may exist
in forensic accounting research.
4. Defnition of forensic accounting
Forensic accounting is often equated with fraud examination or fraud auditing.
However, as Crumbley (2009) points out, “forensic accounting is a challenging discipline
that substantially interacts with auditing, economics, fnance, information systems, and
law”.
Huber and DiGabriele (2014) have given the most comprehensive defnition of
forensic accounting as:
[…] a multidisciplinary feld that encompasses both a profession and an industry, where civil
or criminal economic and fnancial claims, whether business or personal, are contested within
established political structures, recognized and accepted social parameters, and well-defned
legal jurisdictions, and informed by the theories, methods, and procedures from the felds of
law, auditing, accounting, fnance, economics, psychology, sociology, and criminology.
As a multidisciplinary feld, it is both appropriate and necessary that forensic
accounting research be conducted in all aspects of the felds and disciplines contributing
to and informing the feld of forensic accounting. Furthermore, research in forensic
accounting would be expected to use all research methods customarily used in the
disciplines contributing to the feld of forensic accounting. This paper investigates
whether forensic accounting research actually includes the diversity of topics that
inform the feld of forensic accounting, and whether it uses all research methods
customarily used in the disciplines contributing to the feld of forensic accounting.
5. Forensic accounting research journals
There are currently two dedicated forensic accounting research journals – the Journal of
Forensic & Investigative Accounting (JFIA) and the Journal of Forensic Studies in
ARJ
28,1
100
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Accounting and Business (JFSAB). The JFIA began publishing in 2009 and the JFSAB
began publishing in 2009. The Journal of Forensic Accounting (formally The Journal of
Forensic Accounting: Auditing, Fraud &Risk, JFA) began publishing in 2000 and ceased
publishing in 2008. The American Accounting Association’s section on Forensic
Accounting is scheduled to publish its frst issue of the Journal of Forensic Accounting
Research (JFAR) beginning in 2015.
There are many accounting journals that occasionally publish research in forensic
accounting but mostly research that is limited to fraud. For example, The Accounting
Review; Contemporary Accounting Research; Accounting, Organizations and Society;
Journal of Accounting Research; Journal of Accounting and Economics; Journal of
Accounting Literature; Reviewof Accounting Studies; the British Accounting Review; the
Accounting Research Journal; Journal of Accounting and Public Policy; Journal
of Accounting, Ethics and Public Policy; Research in Accounting Regulation;
International Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Performance Evaluation; the Journal
of Business Ethics; and the Pacifc Accounting Review have all published research in
forensic accounting. However, these are not dedicated forensic accounting journals and,
except for occasional special issues, the overwhelming majority of papers are limited to
different aspects of fraud and some special issues dedicated to fraud[3]. Forensic
accounting encompasses a much broader area than just fraud.
In addition to the academic journals there are practitioner journals, such as the
Journal of Accountancy, that occasionally publish articles related to forensic accounting.
Furthermore, forensic accounting certifcation corporations[4] publish their own
journals. The Association of Certifed Fraud Examiners publishes the Fraud Examiner.
The National Association of Certifed Valuators and Analysts publishes The Value
Examiner. The Forensic Examiner is published by American College of Forensic
Examiners Institute.
Only research published in the non-corporate-owned dedicated forensic accounting
journals, the JFIA, the JFSAB and the JFA, is considered here[5]. While most papers
published in forensic accounting journals focus on forensic accounting in the USA, the
JFIA also publishes forensic accounting research from an international perspective.
6. Method and results
6.1 Method
We analyzed and classifed 366 papers published in JFA, JFIA, and JFSABbetween 2000
and 2014 based on title, keywords and/or abstracts. Not all papers had keywords or
abstracts available. Thus, some were judgment calls and some topics of some papers
overlapped (e.g. Fraud and Education). In that case, the predominant topic was used to
classify the paper.
Topics were classifed as Fraud, ForensicAccounting/Practice, Education, Ethics,
Valuation and Other. “ForensicAccounting/Practice” included litigation support
services such as expert witnessing, matrimonial and bankruptcy. “Other” included
internal audit, earnings management and fnancial reporting.
Research methods were classifed as Quantitative (Archival, Experimental, Survey,
Other) and Qualitative (Case Study, Qualitative Discourse, Interview/Focus Groups,
Other), Theoretical, Behavioral, Historical and Instructional.
101
Forensic
accounting
research
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
6.2 Results
The results of this study have revealed interesting and important insights into the
nature of forensic accounting research. Considering topics frst, fraud made up 165 (45.1
per cent) of all papers published in all journals with all methods. Within fraud,
Quantitative Archival included 35 papers (9.6 per cent) of all papers published. Forensic
Accounting/Practice consistedof 94 papers (25.7 per cent), withInstructional methods at
15 per cent. Other was third with 42 papers (11.5 per cent).
Quantitative Archival was the most frequently used method with 31 papers (8.5 per
cent). Education was third, with 36 papers (9.8 per cent). Ethics was ffth with 23 papers
(6.3 per cent) and last was Valuation.
Turning to Research methods, the top two were Instructional methods which made
up 97 papers (26.5 per cent) and Quantitative Archival which made up 88 papers (24 per
cent) of all papers across all topics. Together Instructional and Quantitative Archival
accounted for more than 50 per cent of all methods. In the Education topic area, case
studies were the dominant method (6.6 per cent) (Tables I-VI).
7. Discussion and implications
Obviously, as with accounting research, fraud is the “topic of choice” for the majority of
papers published in forensic accounting journals. While it is less than half (45.1 per cent)
of all papers, the other 55.9 per cent is dispersed across fve other topics. Furthermore,
Quantitative Archival methods made up 21.2 per cent of all fraud methods. All
quantitative methods comprise 39.1 per cent of all methods, with the remaining 61.9 per
cent spread out over the 10 other methods.
These percentages mirror Stone and Miller’s (2013) fndings. Stone and Miller
examined 92 papers published in 9 American Accounting Association journals between
January 2000 and September 2011 according to six areas: audit, fnancial, systems,
managerial, tax and international. They found that audit accounted for 63 per cent of the
papers. In addition, 73.9 per cent of the total used quantitative methods, while 26.1 per
cent used qualitative methods”.
When we consider the results of this survey of forensic accounting research with the
fndings of Stone and Miller, Heck and Jensen (2007 – 99 per cent of all papers published
in The Accounting Review between 1986 and 2005 “contained complex mathematical
equations and multivariate statistical analyses of a narrowsubset of topics amenable to
analysis using mathematics, management science, econometrics and psychometrics”)
and Young (2009 – “85.6 per cent out of 313 articles published between 1992 and 2007 in
Auditing – A Journal of Practice and Theory involved statistical causal analysis and
modeling”), a trend appears to have emerged that should concern both forensic
accountants and forensic accounting researchers.
A signifcant outcome of this study shows the obvious dearth of manuscripts on
valuation topics, one of the major topics of forensic accounting. Valuation is typically
driven by practice, and this indicator should motivate more valuation research in the
forensic accounting feld. Similarly, other topics driven by practice but ignored in the
published forensic research include damages and fnancial issues in domestic relations,
among others, all of which deserve greater attention in forensic accounting research.
The results of this study strongly suggest that forensic accounting researchers are
attempting to emulate the topics and methods used in accounting research journals,
particularly the “elite” journals. Both methodolotry and methodocracy are asserting
ARJ
28,1
102
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Table I.
Total summary
Topic Method JFSAB JFA JFIA
Total
topic
Total
method
%
topic
%
method
Fraud 165 45.1
QuanSurvey 3 10 8 21 5.7
CSQual 2 9 4 15 4.1
QuanArch 2 9 24 35 9.6
QuanExper – 5 8 13 3.6
CDQ – 19 8 27 7.4
Instructional – 16 12 28 7.7
Historical – – 1 1 0.3
Theorectical – 5 6 11 3.0
IFGQual – 1 2 3 0.8
OtherQual – – 2 2 0.5
Other – – 9 9 2.5
Total 7 74 84 165 165 45.1 45.1
ForensicAccounting/
Practice
94 25.7
QuanSurvey – 1 4 5 1.4
CSQual – 6 3 9 2.5
QuanArch – 7 8 15 4.1
QaunExper – – 1 1 0.3
CDQ – 7 2 9 2.5
Instructional 6 33 16 55 15.0
Historical – – – – 0.0
Theorectical – – – – 0.0
IFGQual – – – – 0.0
OtherQual – – – – 0.0
Other – – – – 0.0
Total 6 54 34 94 94 25.7 25.7
Education 36 9.8
QuanSurvey – 1 1 2 0.5
CSQual 8 7 9 24 6.6
QuanArch – – – – 0.0
QuanExp 2 – 1 3 0.8
CDQ 1 – 1 2 0.5
Instructional – 2 – 2 0.5
Historical 1 2 – 3 0.8
Theorectical – – – – 0.0
IFGQual – – – – 0.0
OtherQual – – – – 0.0
Other – – – – 0.0
Total 12 12 12 36 36 9.8 9.8
(continued)
103
Forensic
accounting
research
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
themselves into forensic accounting research. This trend is a cause for concern, as
practitioners do not fnd research published in academic journals to be useful (Inanga
and Schneider, 2005; Huber, 2014). The greater concern, however, is because “forensic”
is inherently integrated with, and inseparable from, legal processes (see defnition
Table I.
Topic Method JFSAB JFA JFIA
Total
topic
Total
method
%
topic
%
method
Ethics 23 6.3
QuanSurvey 1 1 1 3 0.8
CSQaul – 2 2 4 1.1
QuanArch – 2 – 2 0.5
QuanExp – 2 3 5 1.4
CDQ 1 3 3 7 1.9
Instructional 1 1 – 2 0.5
Historical – – – – 0.0
Theorectical – – – – 0.0
IFGQual – – – – 0.0
OtherQual – – – – 0.0
Other – – – – 0.0
Total 3 11 9 23 23 6.3 6.3
Valuation 6 1.6
QuanSurvey – – – 0.0
CSQual – – – 0.0
QuanArch – 5 – 5 1.4
QuanExper – – – – 0.0
CDQ – – – – 0.0
Instructional – 1 1 0.3
Historical – – – – 0.0
Theorectical – – – – 0.0
IFGQual – – – – 0.0
OtherQual – – – – 0.0
Other – – – – 0.0
Total – 6 – 6 6 1.6 1.6
Other 42 11.5
QuanSurvey – – – – 0.0
CSQual – – – – 0.0
QuanArch – 30 1 31 8.5
QuanExper – 1 1 2 0.5
CDQ – – – – 0.0
Instructional – 9 9 2.5
Historical – – – – 0.0
Theorectical – – – – 0.0
IFGQual – – – – 0.0
OtherQual – – – – 0.0
Other – – – – 0.0
Total – 40 1 42 42 11.5 11.5
Grand Total 28 197 140 366 366 100.0 100.0
ARJ
28,1
104
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
above), and thus forensic accountants may be deprived of valuable research that could
potentially be used to resolve contested fnancial and economic claims in a just manner.
8. Conclusion and recommendations
The purpose of this paper is to identify gaps in topics of research and research methods
in forensic accounting literature. The results show that there are several gaps in both
topics and research methods that need to be addressed. To be useful to practitioners,
research in forensic accounting should be expanded to cover all topics that fall within
the canopy of “forensic accounting”. Likewise, forensic accounting researchers should
use more types of research methods than those currently used, so forensic accounting
research can be subject to the full spectrum of research methods.
Forensic accounting is a confuence of many different disciplines such as law,
auditing, accounting, fnance, economics, psychology, sociology and criminology. As a
consequence, forensic accounting research should embrace the diversity of topics.
Similarly, social science research regularly uses qualitative methods such as: narrative
inquiry, research interviews (structured/unstructured), content analysis, focus groups
Table II.
Total method by
total topic
Topic Fraud
Forensic Accounting/
Practice Education Ethics Valuation Other Total
%
Total
QuanSurvey 21 5 2 3 – – 31 8.5
CSQual 15 9 24 4 – – 52 14.2
QuanArch 35 15 – 2 5 31 88 24.0
QuanExper 13 1 3 5 – 2 24 6.6
CDQ 27 9 2 7 – – 45 12.3
Instructional 28 55 2 2 1 9 97 26.5
Historical 1 – – – – – 1 0.3
Theorectical 11 – 3 – – – 14 3.8
IFGQual 3 – – – – 3 0.8
OtherQual 2 – – – – – 2 0.5
Other 9 – – – – – 9 2.5
Total 165 94 36 23 6 42 366 100.0
Table III.
Key
Classifcations Quantitative/empirical Qualitative
Archival QuanArch
Experimental QuanExper
Survey Quan Survey
Other QuanOth
Case study CSQual
Qualitative discourse CDQ
Interview/focus groups IFGQaul
Other OthQaul
Theoretical
Behavioral
Historical
Instructional
105
Forensic
accounting
research
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Table IV.
Journal of Forensic
Studies in
Accounting and
Business
Topic Method 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Total
topic
Total
method
Fraud 7
QuanSurvey 1 – 1 – 1 3
CSQual – 1 1 – – 2
QuanArch – – 1 – 1 2
QuanExper – – – – – –
CDQ – – – – – –
Instructional – – – – – –
Historical – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – –
Other – – – – – –
Total 1 1 3 – 2 7 7
ForensicAccounting/
Practice
6
QuanSurvey – – – – – –
CSQual – – – – – –
QuanArch – – – – – –
QaunExper – – – – – –
CDQ – – – – – –
Instructional 5 – – – 1 6
Historical – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – –
Other – – – – – –
Total 5 – – – 1 6 2
Education 12
QuanSurvey – – – – – –
CSQual 1 4 1 – 2 8
QuanArch –
QuanExp 1 1 – – – 2
CDQ 1 – – – – 1
Instructional – – – – – –
Historical 1 – – – – 1
Theorectical – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – –
Other – – – – – –
Total 4 5 1 – 2 12 12
(continued)
ARJ
28,1
106
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Table IV.
Topic Method 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Total
topic
Total
method
Ethics 2
QuanSurvey – – – – –
CSQaul – – – – – –
QuanArch – – – – – –
QuanExp – – – – – –
CDQ – – – – 1 1
Instructional – – 1 – – 1
Historical – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – –
Other – – – – – –
Total – – 1 – 1 2 2
Valuation –
QuanSurvey – – – – – –
CSQual – – – – – –
QuanArch – – – – – –
QuanExper – – – – – –
CDQ – – – – – –
Instructional – – – – – –
Historical – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – –
Other – – – – – –
Total – – – – – – –
Other –
QuanSurvey – – – – – –
CSQual – – – – – –
QuanArch – – – – – –
QuanExper – – – – – –
CDQ – – – – – –
Instructional – – – – – –
Historical – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – –
Other – – – – – –
Total – – – – – – –
Grand Total 10 6 5 – 6 27 27
107
Forensic
accounting
research
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Table V.
Journal of Forensic &
Investigative
Accounting
Topic Method 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Total
topic
Total
method
Fraud 84
QuanSurvey 2 2 1 1 2 – 8
CSQual 1 1 1 1 – – 4
QuanArch 6 9 4 2 2 1 24
QuanExper 1 3 1 2 1 8
CDQ 1 3 1 – 3 – 8
Instructional 4 2 3 2 – 1 12
Historical 1 – – – – – 1
Theorectical – – 1 2 2 1 6
IFGQual – – – 2 – 2
OtherQual – – – – – 2 2
Other 1 3 3 – 2 9
Total 17 20 17 11 11 8 84 84
ForensicAccounting/
Practice
34
QuanSurvey 1 – 1 1 1 – 4
CSQual – – 1 1 1 – 3
QuanArch 1 3 1 1 1 1 8
QaunExper – 1 – – – 1
CDQ – – 1 1 – – 2
Instructional – 5 3 2 3 3 16
Historical – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – –
Total 2 9 7 6 6 4 34 34
Education 12
QuanSurvey – 1 – – – 1
CSQual 1 – 5 – – 3 9
QuanArch – – – – – – –
QuanExp – – – 1 – 1
CDQ – – – – – 1 1
Instructional – – – – – – –
Historical – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – –
Total 1 1 5 1 – 4 12 12
(continued)
ARJ
28,1
108
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Table V.
Topic Method 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Total
topic
Total
method
Ethics 9
QuanSurvey – – 1 – – – 1
CSQaul – – – – – 2 2
QuanArch – – – – – – –
QuanExp – – 1 – 1 1 3
CDQ – – – 1 – 2 3
Instructional – – – – – – –
Historical – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – –
Total – – 2 1 1 5 9 9
Valuation –
QuanSurvey – – – – – – –
CSQual – – – – – – –
QuanArch – – – – – – –
QuanExper – – – – – – –
CDQ – – – – – – –
Instructional – – – – – – –
Historical – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – –
Total – – – – – – – –
Other 2
QuanSurvey – – – – – – –
CSQual – – – – – – –
QuanArch – – – 1 – – 1
QuanExper – – – 1 – – 1
CDQ – – – – – – –
Instructional – – – – – – –
Historical – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – –
Total – – – 2 – – 2 2
Grand total 20 30 31 21 18 21 141 141
109
Forensic
accounting
research
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Table VI.
Journal of Forensic
Accounting
Topic Method 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Total
topic
Total
method
Fraud 74
QuanSurvey 2 – – 1 – 1 5 1 – 10
CSQual 1 3 1 1 1 – – 1 1 9
QuanArch 2 2 1 1 2 – 1 9
QuanExper 1 – – – 2 1 – 1 – 5
CDQ 2 – – 3 3 2 3 3 3 19
Instructional 1 – 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 16
Historical – – – – – – – – – –
Theorectical – 1 – – 1 1 1 – 1 5
IFGQual – – – – 1 – – – – 1
OtherQual – – – – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – – – –
Total 9 6 4 9 12 10 10 8 6 74 74
ForensicAccounting/
Practice
6
QuanSurvey – – 1 – – – – – – 1
CSQual – 1 2 1 2 – – – – 6
QuanArch 1 1 – – – – 3 2 – 7
QaunExper – – – – – – – – –
CDQ – – 1 1 2 1 2 – – 7
Instructional 1 – 6 6 9 4 2 4 1 33
Historical – – – – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – – – –
Total – 2 10 8 13 5 7 6 1 6 54
12 –
Education 12
QuanSurvey – – 1 – – – – – – 1
CSQual 1 1 1 – 1 1 1 – 1 7
QuanArch – – – – – – – – – –
QuanExp – – – – – – – – –
CDQ – – – – – – – – –
Instructional 1 – – – – – – 1 2
Historical – 1 – – – 1 – – – 2
Theorectical – – – – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – – – –
Total 2 2 2 – 1 2 1 1 1 12 12
(continued)
ARJ
28,1
110
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Table VI.
Topic Method 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Total
topic
Total
method
Ethics 11 –
QuanSurvey – – – – 1 – – – – 1
CSQaul – – – – – 1 1 – – 2
QuanArch – – – – – – 2 – – 2
QuanExp – – – – – – 1 1 – 2
CDQ – 1 – – 2 – – – 3
Instructional – – – – – 1 – – – 1
Historical – – – – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – – – –
Total – 1 – – 1 4 4 1 – 11 11
Valuation 6
QuanSurvey – – – – – – – – – –
CSQual – – – – – – – – – –
QuanArch – 1 – – 1 1 1 1 – 5
QuanExper – – – – – – – – – –
CDQ – – – – – – – – – –
Instructional – – – 1 – – – – – 1
Historical – – – – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – – – –
Total – 1 – 1 1 1 1 1 – 6 6
Other 40
QuanSurvey – – – – – – – – – –
CSQual – – – – – – – – – –
QuanArch – 4 7 5 4 2 3 4 1 30
QuanExper – – – – – – 1 – – 1
CDQ – – – – – – – – – –
Instructional – – – 1 – 2 1 3 2 9
Historical – – – – – – – – – –
Theorectical – – – – – – – – – –
IFGQual – – – – – – – – – –
OtherQual – – – – – – – – – –
Other – – – – – – – – – –
Total – 4 7 6 4 4 5 7 3 40 40
Grand Total 13 16 23 24 32 26 28 24 11 197 197
111
Forensic
accounting
research
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
and discourse analysis (Meyers, 2013), and research in forensic accounting should
likewise utilize all research tools and methods at their disposal.
Among other things, future research should investigate, in more detail, the types of
research published in forensic accounting journals and consider trends over time. This
research could reveal additional gaps in both topics and methods.
Notes
1. Here, “forensic accountants” refers to those who are engaged in the practice of forensic
accounting.
2. The reign of a particular method and methodology is a methodocracy (Ruth, 2007).
3. For example, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Volume 38, Issues 6-7, pages 407-558
(August-October 2013).
4. Forensic accounting certifcation corporations are corporations that issue certifcations in
forensic accounting related disciplines such as fraud examination and valuation.
5. See Appendix for the missions and scopes of the journals.
References
American Accounting Association (AAA) (2013c), The Accounting Review, available at: www.
allentrack.net/AAA/Editorial_Policies/ACCR.pdf
Brown, L.D. (1996), “Infuential accounting articles, individuals, Ph.D. granting institutions and
faculties: a citation analysis”, Accounting Organizations and Society, Vol. 21, pp. 723-754.
Crumbley, D.L. (2009), “So what is forensic accounting?”, The ABO Reporter, available at: http://
aaahq.org/abo/reporter/fall09/abo08.htm
Crumbley, D.L., Heitger, L E. and Smith, G.S. (2013), Forensic and Investigative Accounting, 6th
ed., CCH Group, Chicago, IL.
Heck, J.L. and Jensen, R.E. (2007), “An analysis of the evolution of research contributions by the
accounting review, 1926-2005”, The Accounting Historians Journal, Vol. 34 No. 2,
pp. 109-141.
Huber, W.D. (2014), “The research-publication complex and the construct shift in accounting
research”, International Journal of Critical Accounting, Vol. 6 No. 3.
Huber, W.D. and DiGabriele, J.A. (2014), “Research in forensic accounting – what matters?”,
Journal of Theoretical Accounting Research, Vol. 10 No. 1.
Inanga, E.L. and Schneider, W.B. (2005), “The failure of accounting research to improve
accounting practice: a problem of theory and lack of communication”, Critical Perspectives
on Accounting, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 227-248.
Janesick, V.A. (2000), “The choreography of qualitative research design”, in Denzin, N.A. and
Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks,
pp. 379-399.
JFA (2000), Journal of Forensic Accounting, Vol. 1 No. 1, p. 1.
JFA (2008), Journal of Forensic Accounting, Vol. 9 No. 1, p. 1.
JFSAB (2014), Journal of Forensic Studies in Accounting and Business, available at:http://coba.
georgiasouthern.edu/jfsab/.
Kachelmeier, S. (2009), “Annual report and editorial commentary for the accounting review”, The
Accounting Review, Vol. 84 No. 6, pp. 2047-2075.
ARJ
28,1
112
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Kachelmeier, S. (2012), “Accounting education using computers and multimedia”, available at:http://listserv.aaahq.org/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2?ind1204e&L?aecm&F?P&S?&P?30077
Kaplan, R. (2011), “Accounting scholarship that advances professional knowledge and practice”,
The Accounting Review, Vol. 86 No. 2, pp. 367-383.
Merchant, K.A. (2008), “Why interdisciplinary accounting research tends not to impact most
North American academic accountants”, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 19 No. 1,
pp. 901-908.
Meyers, M.D. (2013), Qualitative Research in Business and Management, Sage, London.
Moerman, L. (2010), “Accounting research and the sociology of knowledge”, Paper presented to
Sixth Asia Pacifc Interdisciplinary Research in Accounting Conference, Sydney, 12-13
July.
Ruth, S. (2007), “Methodocracy, misogyny, and bad faith: sexism in the philosophic
establishment”, Metaphilosophy, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 48-61.
Stone, D.N. and Miller, T.C. (2013), “The state of, and prospects for, forensic and fraud research
that matters”, Journal of Forensic & Investigative Accounting, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 35-76.
Young, J.J. (2009), “The absence of dissent”, Accounting and the Public Interest, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 1-9.
Yuille, J.C. (2013), “The challenge for forensic memory research: methodolotry”, in Cooper, B.S.,
Griesel, D. and Ternes, M. (Eds), Applied Issues in Investigative Interviewing, Eyewitness
Memory, and Credibility Assessment, Springer, Verlag, New York.
Further reading
JFIA (2014), Journal of Forensic & Investigative Accounting, available at: www.bus.lsu.
edu/accounting/faculty/lcrumbley/jfa/Default.htm.
Appendix A. Forensic accounting journals
Journal of Forensic Accounting
The Journal of Forensic Accounting: Auditing, Fraud &Taxation (JFA) is an important forum
for publication of forensic accounting research, striving to establish a balance between
theoretical and empirical studies. JFA considers papers on fraud and fraud auditing, risk
assessment, detection of earnings manipulation and tax evasion, bankruptcy studies, GAAP
violation, fnancial statement fraud, internal auditing, and the underground economy. In
addition, papers on particular techniques, technologies, and preventative controls are also
presented, and review articles of importance to forensic accountants are occasionally invited.
(JFA, 2000)
The Editorial Policy of the last issue published in June, 2008 stated the following:
The Journal of Forensic Accounting: Auditing, Fraud & Risk (JFA) is an independent
international forumfor the publication of research dealing with the models and methodologies
of investigative and forensic accounting, seeking to establish a balance between theoretical
and empirical studies, and striving to foster practitioner-academic dialogue and collaboration.
The focus of the journal is on the evidentiary nature of accounting data, and topics include
fraud and forensic auditing; compliance, due diligence, and risk assessment; detection of
fnancial statement misrepresentation and tax evasion; bankruptcy and valuation studies;
GAAP, GAAS and SEC violations; non-standard entries, structured transactions, and
earnings management (non-neutral fnancial reporting); discovery, custody, analysis, and
admissibility of economic evidence; fair presentation and disclosure transparency; audit
quality review and evaluation; transaction tracing, reconstruction, and accountability;
economic damage calculation; fnancial reporting systemabuses, vulnerabilities, and security;
113
Forensic
accounting
research
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
litigation support and dispute avoidance; extended procedures within the statutory audit;
money and information laundering; and the underground economy; among others. In addition,
papers on particular techniques and technologies, as well as preventative controls and
improved standards are invited. Submitted research should be grounded in real-world
business problems or litigation issues faced by practitioners and entity stakeholders
(JFA, 2008).
Journal of Forensic & Investigative Accounting
“The Journal of Forensic & Investigative Accounting (JFIA) publishes creative and innovative
studies using research methodologies that logically and clearly:
• identify, describe and illuminate important academic forensic accounting, fraud and
litigation services issues;
• tests and improves forensic accounting research skills, tools and techniques;
• stimulates discussion and experimentation in instructional means, methods and materials
in the feld of forensic accounting and research in general; and
• exchanges of ideas and fndings about developments related to instruction, learning and
curricular issues in forensic accounting and fraud education” (JFIA, 2014).
Journal of forensic studies in accounting and business
The Journal of Forensic Studies in Accounting and Business (JFSAB) is a refereed academic
journal that publishes basic research, applied, practice, and pedagogical papers in the areas of
fraud and forensic studies across the felds of business, economics and law (JFSAB, 2014).
About the authors
James A. DiGabriele, PhD/DPS, CPA/ABV/CFF, is a Professor of Accounting at Montclair State
University. His primary research focuses on, forensic accounting, private company valuation,
investigative accounting and auditing. His principal teaching areas are, Forensic Accounting,
Fraud Examination, Auditing and Financial Accounting. His articles have appeared in numerous
academic and professional journals including, Accounting Horizons, Critical Perspectives on
Accounting, Journal of Legal Economics, Journal of Forensic Accounting, Journal of Forensic &
Investigative Accounting, The CPAJournal, Journal of Accountancy, Journal of Business Valuation
& Economic Loss Analysis, Journal of Theoretical Accounting Research, and Issues in Accounting
Education.
Wm. Dennis Huber, JD, DBA, CPA, CFE, is a core Faculty Member at Capella University
School of Business and Technology. His research in forensic accounting and accounting history
has been published in the Journal of Forensic & Investigative Accounting; Research in Accounting
Regulation; International Journal of Critical Accounting; Journal of Accounting, Ethics and Public
Policy; Journal of Theoretical Accounting Research; and Journal of Accounting, Ethics and Public
Policy. Wm. Dennis Huber is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:
[email protected]
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]
ARJ
28,1
114
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
1
:
2
1
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
doc_166298640.pdf