This analysis identifies methods to reduce research fraud in accounting, suggesting enhanced controls and practices from other disciplines.
Accounting research has little value if users question its reliability. Most accounting journals have limited controls to screen for research fraud. However, as the number of retractions across academia grows, so too do calls for journals to consider ways in which they might screen for and deter researchers from engaging in this type of behavior. Drawing on practice, journals in other domains, and research, we identify additional processes and controls that could be implemented and evaluate arguments for and against each. Our purpose is to encourage and inform discussion of whether and how accounting journals can respond to the risk of research fraud. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Eaton et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: