Fraudulent Research Practices in Accounting: A Replication and Extension of Bailey, Hasselback, and Karcher (2001)

Bailey et al. (2001) queried accounting researchers concerning admitted fraudulent research practices, their beliefs about the prevalence of such practices among their peers, and their perceptions of the causal factors. They used a randomized response technique that assures anonymity, and it remains the only published study to ask these questions explicitly. Over the past two decades, publication pressures have increased, and accounting academia has experienced a shocking instance of fraud. The current study replicates Bailey et al. (2001) and extends the study by asking new questions about the adequacy of participants’ graduate training, the perceived attitudes and practices of mentors and coauthors, and whether their awareness and concern have evolved. Participants’ comments provide insights about the accounting research environment. Importantly, they indicate a lack of consensus about the legitimacy of research practices.