Examining Students’ Feelings and Perceptions of Accounting Profession in a Developing Country: The Role of Gender and Student Category
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the preconceived notions accounting students in Ghana have about the accounting profession and whether these perceptions are influenced by gender and student category (graduates and undergraduates). This study was a cross-sectional survey of 516 undergraduate and 78 graduate accounting students from a public university in Ghana. A self-administered structured questionnaire was developed to collect primary data. Data were analysed using SPSS 16.0. The results of this study show that, generally, both undergraduate and graduate accounting students have positive perceptions about accounting profession, contrary to most existing literature. Our findings indicate that despite the generally negative perception held by the public about accountants’ behaviour, accounting students in Ghana do not share the same perception with the public. This study also found that gender influences the perception of both graduate and undergraduate accounting students, and few significant differences existed between graduate and undergraduate accounting students’ perception of the profession. This research contributes to the academic debate surrounding the concerns of the future of accounting profession and its implications for contemporary accounting education in developing countries. It also provides knowledge to accounting educators in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) regarding areas of career orientation and training required to positively influence the perception of future accounting professionals in SSA and Ghana in particular. The limitations of this study are discussed to provide directions for future research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".