Co-authorship in accounting history: advantages and pitfalls

Richard Fleischman and Karen Schuele

Accounting History Review, 2009, vol. 19, issue 3, 287-303

Abstract: Relatively little has been written about co-authorship in accounting and even less specific to accounting history. This paper endeavours to track co-authorship patterns in the discipline, both quantitatively and qualitatively. The three specialist accounting history journals provide the data to render quantitative judgements, whilst a survey of accounting history scholars has generated information on how co-authorship is perceived in the field, particularly its benefits and pitfalls. A matching technique is used to gauge whether patterns in accounting history are similar to those within the broader accounting discipline. Consideration will also be given to comparisons of how co-authorship is viewed by US and non-US academicians.

Keywords: accounting history; co-authorship; co-authorship quantitatively and qualitatively; US and non-US co-authorship surveys (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2009
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (8)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09585200903246536 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:acbsfi:v:19:y:2009:i:3:p:287-303

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/rabf21

DOI: 10.1080/09585200903246536

Access Statistics for this article

Accounting History Review is currently edited by Stephen Walker

More articles in Accounting History Review from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().