IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/accted/v23y2014i4p343-361.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Beyond Gender Performance in Accounting: Does Personality Distinction Matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Lars Fallan
  • Leiv Opstad

Abstract

This study questions whether the contradictory results from previous studies of gender and performance in accounting is because gender has no mutually homogeneous groups. A combination of gender and personality types will provide a more balanced picture of academic performance in accounting.There are three main findings in this study: the dichotomous gender variable covers two groups that are mutually heterogeneous, and it contributes to diluting any effects of gender on academic performance in management accounting; when each of these groups is combined with personality characteristics of female and male students, we obtain a more robust and complex picture, showing that gender combined with personal preferences is significant for performance; performance is independent of personality preferences when it comes to positive affect of ability, perceived preparation before lectures, after lectures, and interest for the subject, and negative affect of perceived degree of difficulty of the subject.

Suggested Citation

  • Lars Fallan & Leiv Opstad, 2014. "Beyond Gender Performance in Accounting: Does Personality Distinction Matter?," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(4), pages 343-361, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:accted:v:23:y:2014:i:4:p:343-361
    DOI: 10.1080/09639284.2014.930693
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09639284.2014.930693
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09639284.2014.930693?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrea L. Ziegert, 2000. "The Role of Personality Temperament and Student Learning in Principles of Economics: Further Evidence," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(4), pages 307-322, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Asit Bhattacharyya & Mohammed Lutfur Rahman, 2020. "Values, gender and attitudes towards environmental policy: A study of future managers," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2514-2527, September.
    2. Huikku, Jari & Myllymäki, Emma-Riikka & Ojala, Hannu, 2022. "Gender differences in the first course in accounting: An achievement goal approach," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(3).
    3. Apostolou, Barbara & Dorminey, Jack W. & Hassell, John M. & Rebele, James E., 2015. "Accounting education literature review (2013–2014)," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 69-127.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stephen Hickson, 2016. "Maybe the Boys Just Like Economics More - The Gender Gap and the Role of Personality Type in Economics Education," Working Papers in Economics 16/07, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
    2. Cynthia L. Harter & John F.R. Harter, 2004. "Teaching with Technology: Does Access to Computer Technology Increase Student Achievement?," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 30(4), pages 507-514, Fall.
    3. Delaney, Liam & Harmon, Colm & Ryan, Martin, 2013. "The role of noncognitive traits in undergraduate study behaviours," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 181-195.
    4. Paul Dalziel, 2011. "Schumpeter's 'Vision' and the Teaching of Principles of Economics to Resource Students," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 10(2), pages 63-74.
    5. Leonard C. Smith, 2009. "An Analysis Of The Impact Of Pedagogic Interventions In First‐Year Academic Development And Mainstream Courses In Microeconomics," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 77(1), pages 162-178, March.
    6. Roger B. Butters & Carlos J. Asarta & Tammie J. Fischer, 2011. "Human Capital in The Classroom: The Role of Teacher Knowledge in Economic Literacy," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 56(2), pages 47-57, November.
    7. Joshua D. Miller & Robert P. Rebelein, 2011. "Research on the Effectiveness of Non-Traditional Pedagogies," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 30, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Jon Murphy & John Schuler & Jadrian Wooten, 2020. "Have Coase - Will Travel: New Ways to Teach Coase Using Old Media," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 35(Winter 20), pages 71-86.
    9. Carlos Asarta & Ken Rebeck, 2011. "Measurement Techniques of Student Performance and Literacy: College and High School," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 29, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Elchanan Cohn & Sharon Cohn & Donald C. Balch & James Bradley Jr., 2004. "The Relation between Student Attitudes toward Graphs and Performance in Economics," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 48(2), pages 41-52, October.
    11. Anthony Barilla & Darrell Parker & Chris Paul, 2005. "An Educational Note on Locus of Control and Personality Type in the Formation of Students' Attitudes Toward Economic Institutions," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 20(Spring 20), pages 192-202.
    12. Ann L. Owen, 2011. "Student Characteristics, Behavior, and Performance in Economics Classes," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 32, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Abdullah Al‐Bahrani & Darshak Patel, 2015. "Using ESPN 30 for 30 to teach economics," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 81(3), pages 829-842, January.
    14. Andrea L. Ziegert & KimMarie McGoldrick, 2008. "When Service is Good for Economics: Linking the Classroom and Community through Service-Learning," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 7(2), pages 39-56.
    15. Stephen Hickson, 2010. "The Impact of Question Format in Principle of Economics Classes: Evidence from New Zealand," Working Papers in Economics 10/10, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
    16. Arlette Beltrán Barco & Karlos La Serna Studzinski, 2008. "¿Qué explica el rendimiento académico en el primer año de estudios universitarios? Un estudio de caso en la Universidad del Pacífico," Working Papers 08-09, Centro de Investigación, Universidad del Pacífico.
    17. Carlos J. Asarta & Roger B. Butters & Eric Thompson, 2013. "The Gender Question in Economic Education: Is it the Teacher or the Test?," Working Papers 13-12, University of Delaware, Department of Economics.
    18. Rapheal Andrew Luccasen III, 2012. "Individual Differences In Contributions And Crowding-Out Of A Public Good," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 59(4), pages 419-441, September.
    19. Patrick Conway & Derek Stimel & Ann E. Davis & Monica Hartmann, 2010. "Case Use in Economics Instruction," Chapters, in: Michael K. Salemi & William B. Walstad (ed.), Teaching Innovations in Economics, chapter 9, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Marianne Johnson & Denise Robson & Sarinda Taengnoi, 2014. "A Meta-analysis of the Gender Gap in Performance in Collegiate Economics Courses," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 72(4), pages 436-459, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:accted:v:23:y:2014:i:4:p:343-361. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAED20 .

    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.