Empirical Evidence from the Behavioral Sciences: Fish Out of Water.

Abstract

In the article, the author presents an analysis of the paper by John P. Fertakis, which attempts to draw conclusions with respect to accounting on the basis of unrelated or only indirectly related studies in the behavioral sciences. According to the author, his paper merely contains several examples of what may become even more prevalent in accounting. Accounting research frequently has its tentacles extended into the research efforts of scientists in the fields of psychology, sociology, economics, statistics, operations research, management science, etc. In so doing, accountants are looking to others for answers in order to avoid the dirty and painstakingly slow, expensive, and methodical means by which empirical evidence can be conceived and nurtured in their own studies. But this outside empirical evidence often flounders like a fish out of water when plucked from the environment in which it was generated. In addition, accountants must heed the cautions of scientists who generated and/or analyzed the cited empirical evidence. In supplying more information in annual reports, accounts are thereby making it possible for users to make finer distinctions between more companies. Professor Fertakis should note that his suggested "seven items" for a standard report are not one-dimensional at all.