A retrospective analysis of auditing research (1975-2009)

The purpose of this paper is to assess the quality of doctoral programs in terms of their faculty auditing research output as well as their effectiveness in training future auditing faculty.

This paper presents a retrospective analysis of auditing research that appeared in five premier accounting journals (AOS, TAR, CAR, JAE, and JAR) during the time period 1975-2009.

The authors offer several new insights. First, the authors provide rankings of accounting programs based on their faculty's research output as well as their graduates' research output. The rankings of auditing research are significantly different from those that are based on aggregated accounting research output. Second, the rankings are found to be skewed; due to the display of high concentrations of auditing research among the top auditing research programs. Third, the rankings have exhibited considerable changes over time, which suggest extreme competitions in maintaining the relative positions of the doctoral programs. Fourth, the authors detect a noticeable change in auditing research methodologies.

The findings are useful to: new and job-seeking auditing doctorates in selecting academic appointments; potential doctoral students in identifying auditing graduate programs that best fit their career goals; university administrators in assessing their auditing faculty; and auditing scholars in positioning their journal outlets.

The study extends the findings of the previous studies by focusing on auditing research publications in top journals over a long sample period. The authors also provide evidence of changes in research methodologies in auditing research as well as changes in rankings among different institutions in recent years.