MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123234998

Accounting, Organizations, and Institutions: Essays in Honour of Anthony Hopwood

2009· preprint· en· W3123234998 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christopher S. Chapman, David J. Cooper, Peter Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2009
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Organizational Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccountingManagement accountingSocial accountingPositive accountingAuditPolitical scienceSociologyPublic relationsAccounting information systemFinancial accountingBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accounting has an ever-increasing significance in contemporary society. Indeed, some argue that its practices are fundamental to the development and functioning of modern capitalist societies. We can see accounting everywhere: in organizations where budgeting, investing, costing, and performance appraisal rely on accounting practices; in financial and other audits; in corporate scandals and financial reporting and regulation; in corporate governance, risk management, and accountability, and in the corresponding growth and influence of the accounting profession. Accounting, too, is an important part of the curriculum and research of business and management schools, the fastest growing sector in higher education. This growth is largely a phenomenon of the last 50 years or so. Prior to that, accounting was seen mainly as a mundane, technical, bookkeeping exercise (and some still share that naive view). The growth in accounting has demanded a corresponding engagement by scholars to examine and highlight the important behavioural, organizational, institutional, and social dimensions of accounting. Pioneering work by accounting researchers and social scientists more generally has persuasively demonstrated to a wider social science, professional, management, and policy audience how many aspects of life are indeed constituted, to an important extent, through the calculative practices of accounting. Anthony Hopwood, to whom this book is dedicated, has been a leading figure in this endeavour, which has effectively defined accounting as a distinctive field of research in the social sciences. The book brings together the work of leading international accounting academics and social scientists, and demonstrates the scope, vitality, and insights of contemporary scholarship in and on accounting and auditing. Available in OSO: http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/oso/public/content/management/9780199546350/toc.html Contributors to this volume - Thomas Ahrens, University of Warwick, Patricia J. Arnold, Sheldon B. Lubar School of Business, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Jane Baxter, Australian School of Business, University of New South Wales, Alnoor Bhimani, London School of Economics and Political Science, Jacob G. Birnberg, Murphy Professor of Control Systems Emeritus, University of Pittsburgh, Michael Bromwich, London School of Economics and Political Science, Michel Callon, CSI/ENSMP, Salvador Carmona, IE Business School, Madrid, Spain, Christopher S. Chapman, Imperial College Business School, Imperial College London, Wai Fong Chua, Australian School of Business, University of New South Wales, David J. Cooper, School of Business, University of Alberta, Mark A. Covaleski, The Robert Beyer Professor of Managerial Accounting, Graduate School of Business, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Barbara Czarniawska, University of Gothenburg, Mark W. Dirsmith, Deloitte & Touche Professor of Accounting, Smeal College of Business Administration and The Social Thought Program, University Park, Marie-Laure Djelic, ESSEC, Mahmoud Ezzamel, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Christopher Humphrey, University of Manchester, Sten Jonsson, GRI, School of Business, Economics and Law, Goteborg University, Vincent-Antonin Lepinay, STS/MIT Robert Libby, Cornell University, Anne Loft, University of Lund, Peter B. Miller, Department of Accounting, London School of Economic and Political Science, Jan Mouritsen, Copenhagen Business School, Michael Power, London School of Economics and Political Science, Keith Robson, Cardiff Business School, University of Cardiff, Kerstin Sahlin, Uppsala Universitet, Sajay Samuel, Clinical Faculty, Smeal College of Business Administration, University Park Nicholas Seybert, University of Texas at Austin, Michael D. Shields, Schaberg Endowed Chair in Accounting, Michigan State University, Prem Sikka, University of Essex, Hugh Willmott, University of Cardiff, Joni Young, University of New Mexico.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations64
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicAccounting and Organizational ManagementFrench-language works237,207