IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Global ranking of accounting programmes and the elite effect in accounting research


  • Kam C. Chan
  • Carl R. Chen
  • Louis T. W. Cheng


We provide a global ranking of accounting research and examine the elite degree and elite affiliation effect. Based on 24 accounting journals during the period 1991–2005, the top 5 most productive countries in accounting research are in the following order: the USA, the UK, Australia, Canada and Hong Kong. We find a significant elite degree effect, indicating that authors who graduated from elite accounting programmes have a disproportionate share of publications in top‐notch journals. The same conclusion is also supported by the elite affiliation effect in which leading accounting journals have higher concentration of authors who are affiliated with elite institutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Kam C. Chan & Carl R. Chen & Louis T. W. Cheng, 2007. "Global ranking of accounting programmes and the elite effect in accounting research," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 47(2), pages 187-220, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:acctfi:v:47:y:2007:i:2:p:187-220
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-629X.2007.00234.x

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Kam Chan & Carl Chen & Louis Cheng, 2005. "Ranking Research Productivity in Accounting for Asia-Pacific Universities," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 47-64, January.
    2. Williams, Paul F. & Jenkins, J. Gregory & Ingraham, Laura, 2006. "The winnowing away of behavioral accounting research in the US: The process for anointing academic elites," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(8), pages 783-818, November.
    3. Cox, Raymond A K & Chung, Kee H, 1991. "Patterns of Research Output and Author Concentration in the Economics Literature," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 73(4), pages 740-747, November.
    4. Kam C. Chan & Carl R. Chen & Thomas L. Steiner, 2002. "Production in the Finance Literature, Institutional Reputation, and Labor Mobility in Academia: A Global Perspective," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 31(4), Winter.
    5. Collins, Jeffery T & Cox, Richard Guy & Stango, Victor, 2000. "The Publishing Patterns of Recent Economics Ph.D. Recipients," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 38(2), pages 358-367, April.
    6. Niemi, Albert W, Jr, 1987. "Institutional Contributions to the Leading Finance Journals, 1975 through 1986: A Note," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 42(5), pages 1389-1397, December.
    7. Brown, Lawrence D., 1996. "Influential accounting articles, individuals, Ph.D. granting institutions and faculties: A citational analysis," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 21(7-8), pages 723-754.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Christoph Endenich & Rouven Trapp, 2016. "Cooperation for Publication? An Analysis of Co-authorship Patterns in Leading Accounting Journals," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 613-633, September.
    2. Jesse Y. Chan & Kam C. Chan & Jamie Y. Tong & Feida (Frank) Zhang, 2016. "Using Google Scholar citations to rank accounting programs: a global perspective," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 29-55, July.
    3. Geert Van Campenhout & Tom Van Caneghem, 2010. "Article Contribution and Subsequent Citation Rates: Evidence from European Accounting Review," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 837-855.
    4. Brinn, Tony & Jones, Michael John, 2008. "The determinants of a successful accounting manuscript: Views of the informed," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 89-113.
    5. Baldwin, Amelia A. & Lightbody, Margaret G. & Brown, Carol E. & Trinkle, Brad S., 2012. "Twenty years of minority PhDs in accounting: Signs of success and segregation," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 298-311.
    6. Kam C. Chan & Kartono Liano, 2009. "Threshold citation analysis of influential articles, journals, institutions and researchers in accounting," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 49(1), pages 59-74, March.
    7. Jayne Bisman & Weini Liao, 2009. "Making the mainstream: An analysis of the scholarly literature on accounting in China, 1999-2008," Asian Review of Accounting, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 17(3), pages 180-197, September.
    8. Matías Ginieis & Xiaoni Li, 2020. "Ranking of Sustainability Journals Using the Author Affiliation Index and Comparison to Other Journal Metrics," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(3), pages 1-18, February.
    9. Matthew M. Wieland & Mark C. Dawkins & Michael T. Dugan, 2016. "Assessing the Elite Publication Benefits of Academic Pedigree: A Joint Examination of PhD Institution and Employment Institution," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 269-309, December.
    10. Jane Baxter & Wai Fong Chua, 2008. "The field researcher as author-writer," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 5(2), pages 101-121, June.
    11. Zamojcin, Kimberly A. & Bernardi, Richard A., 2013. "Ranking North American accounting scholars publishing accounting education papers: 1966–2011," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 194-212.
    12. Rose Prasad & S. Benjamin Prasad, 2009. "Output versus salient impact in financial economics," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(21), pages 1697-1704.
    13. Wai Fong Chua, 2011. "In Search of 'Successful' Accounting Research," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 27-39.
    14. Bernardi, Richard A. & Collins, Kimberly Z., 2019. "‘Leveling the playing field’ when ranking accounting-education authors," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 1-25.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:acctfi:v:47:y:2007:i:2:p:187-220. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley Content Delivery). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.