IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/medarp/v23y2015i3p348-368.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender differences in locus of control and student performance in the South African context of accounting studies

Author

Listed:
  • Chris Callaghan
  • Elmarie Papageorgiou

Abstract

Purpose - – This paper aims to test the theory that predicts differences in locus of control (LOC) by gender and the relationships between LOC and the performance of accounting students in a large South African university. Design/methodology/approach - – Confirmatory factor analysis was applied to test the applicability of Spector’s (1988) LOC scales as a first-order construct in this context. An exploratory factor analysis was then performed to provide a more fine-grained analysis of subordinate constructs. Three component categories were found to emerge from a test of this widely used LOC questionnaire. These component categories were classified as beliefs about the effectiveness of agency, beliefs about chance and beliefs about networks in the contribution to the attainment of outcomes in working contexts. Findings - – Further tests revealed that female accounting students demonstrate higher LOC in all the three categories. Females were therefore found to have significantly higher levels of both LOC and student performance; yet, the majority of tested items were not significant in their associations, and total LOC was not found to be associated with higher performance for female or male students. Certain individual items were, however, found to be associated with performance for male students. It is concluded that despite the predictions of seminal theory that predicts convergence around gender, or more egalitarian outcomes in high-skilled contexts over time, accounting student performance in this context might currently be dominated by females. This reflects a current general dominance of females in higher educational attainment and in employment numbers in educational contexts. Research limitations/implications - – Limitations of the study include: first, the use of a single university; second, a sample of only first-year accounting students. It is not known whether these findings generalise beyond accounting students with similar university environments. This research is also not causal in nature. The statistical testing used in this study cannot indicate causality. Originality/value - – It is recommended that further research investigate the more fine-grained dimensions of LOC that can contribute to accounting student performance and that further qualitative or causal research is performed to “surface” the causal mechanisms that underlie these findings. The value of this research is in the fact that it tests theory that predicts differences in LOC and the relationships between LOC and performance in an important formative context of accounting.

Suggested Citation

  • Chris Callaghan & Elmarie Papageorgiou, 2015. "Gender differences in locus of control and student performance in the South African context of accounting studies," Meditari Accountancy Research, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 23(3), pages 348-368, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:medarp:v:23:y:2015:i:3:p:348-368
    DOI: 10.1108/MEDAR-02-2014-0018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/MEDAR-02-2014-0018/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/MEDAR-02-2014-0018/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/MEDAR-02-2014-0018?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    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:eme:medarp:v:23:y:2015:i:3:p:348-368. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.