Introduction to the Special Issue of Qualitative Research in Accounting
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction to the Special Issue of Qualitative Research in AccountingWe are delighted to have been able to act as guest editors for this special issue of Accounting Perspectives on qualitative research in accounting.We are not only grateful to everyone who contributed but also proud of the motivations and outcomes.Conversations around this theme began between Leslie Berger, the former editor-in-chief of the journal, and Philippe Lassou in early 2019, while the latter was organizing the Qualitative Research in Accounting Symposium, which takes place at the University of Guelph every November.Matthew Bamber was invited into the process a few weeks later.Little did any of us know at the time that the world was on the verge of major change.The COVID-19 pandemic made certain that our small talk concerning the weather (after all, it is Canada) and the new term would give way to personal and professional anxiety about the health and well-being of our friends, family, and colleagues.Looking back, who would have known that, mere days later, our calendars would be emptied to make space for online courses about Zoom-based teaching and learning strategies and best practices?One thing, however, did not change during this period-namely, Leslie's energy and commitment to signaling that Accounting Perspectives is a welcoming journal that is open to research regardless of methodological paradigm.A "pluralistic view of research," as it has been termed by Sean Lyons, Associate Dean of Research at the University of Guelph (and an unwavering supporter of the Symposium), is crucial in providing a comprehensive understanding of the interplay between accounting, the economy, and society.This is what Accounting Perspectives promotes.Furthermore, Adam Presslee, the current editor-in-chief, shares this same vision.In many ways, this is the point that we want to make in this editorial-namely, that if you are doing qualitative research in accounting, then you should consider Accounting Perspectives as a potential outlet for your work.The editorial board includes talented and open-minded people from an array of backgrounds who have extensive experience in a range of approaches, many of whom are passionate about high-quality qualitative research in accounting.This special issue features five articles that examine accounting and accountability issues across private for-profit, government, and not-for-profit organizations.All five studies employ case study methods, whether that be a single case (Maharaj; Campbell, Li, Zhang, and Sinclair; Smirnow and Deng), a case in extremis (Popoola and Maier), or multiple cases (Arroyo Pardo, Smaili, and Bensid).Maharaj's study explores the investigation by the US Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations into HSBC operations with respect to alleged money laundering.He shows how the bank uses inscriptions as part of its form-based practices to enact various measures intended to address the requirements of money laundering regulations.In so
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,027 | 0,072 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,012 | 0,010 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,010 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,008 | 0,014 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,086 | 0,021 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».