Theory Testing and Process Evidence in Accounting Experiments

H. Scott Asay, Ryan Guggenmos, Kathryn Kadous, Lisa Koonce, Robert LibbyAccounting财务报告UTD24

The Accounting Review2021-12-16University of Iowa; Bucknell University; Cornell University; Emory University; The University of Texas at AustinDOI

Citations188

ABSTRACT This paper discusses the role of process evidence in accounting research. We define process evidence broadly as data providing insight into how and why cause-effect relationships occur, and we provide a framework to guide the provision and evaluation of process evidence in accounting studies. Our definition allows for an expanded understanding of techniques for gathering process evidence. The framework highlights the importance of the study's goals and theory in choosing how to provide process evidence, as well as how much process evidence to provide. The paper also outlines the strengths and limitations of three approaches to providing process evidence: mediation, moderation, and multiple-study-based designs. We provide recommendations for best practices for each approach to minimize threats to validity and maximize the value of process evidence.

Process (computing)ModerationAccounting researchMediationProcess managementAccountingComputer scienceManagement scienceBusinessEconomicsPolitical scienceAuditing, Earnings Management, Governance