The goal of most accounting scholars—especially those at the top research institutions—is to publish in a small set of four to six "elite" journals. Nevertheless, evidence in Swanson (2004) highlights the challenges accounting professors face in placing articles in these journals. Even though accounting faculties tend to be larger than those in other business disciplines, the top-four accounting journals publish fewer articles per year than the top journals in finance, marketing, and management.2 As a result, a smaller portion of research faculty in accounting—as compared to finance, marketing, and management—successfully publish in the highest-ranked journals.
In addition, authors contributing articles to the elite accounting journals tend to be dominated by researchers from U.S. universities granting doctoral degrees in accounting. At the extreme, Attaway, et al. (2008) find that approximately 80% of the authors appearing in the Journal of Accounting and Economics and the Journal of Accounting Research—during 2003 and 2004—are from such universities. Similarly, Griffiths and Winters (2005) argue that authors from schools outside the top 100 typically do not place articles in the elite finance journals (a result that is likely to hold for accounting publications as well).
Because publishing in the elite accounting journals is so difficult, some high-quality articles may be relegated to the second tier of accounting journals. Glover et al., 2006 Steven M. Glover, Douglas F. Prawitt and David A. Wood, Publication records of faculty promoted at the top 75 accounting research programs, Issues in Accounting Education 21 (2006), pp. 195–218. Full Text via CrossRefGlover, Prawitt, and Wood (2006) report that the research portfolios of successful candidates for promotion at the top accounting research universities typically include several articles in these journals. In addition, the relative importance of publications in the second tier increases as the (subjective) ranking of an accounting department decreases from 1 to 75.3 Thus, it appears that tier-two accounting publications serve as supporting evidence of research productivity at the premier research schools, and as a primary indicator of research excellence at many high-quality (but not elite) institutions.
Evidence in Hasselback, Reinstein, and Schwan (2000) provides additional evidence attesting to the difficulty of publishing in the better accounting journals. They find that 39% of accounting faculty earning doctoral degrees from 1971 to 1993 never published in a set of 40 top accounting and business journals, and only 9% accumulated 9 or more articles. Based on these results, they recommend that "For critical periods of tenure and promotion, perhaps 6–10 years, an institution desiring to place in the top third of all institutions could set a benchmark of two or three articles in the best 40 journals."4
To provide additional perspective on the questions of who publishes in the top-two tiers of accounting journals, and how often, this paper identifies the most prolific authors—from 1970 to 2009—across 15 high-impact accounting journals, and in each individual journal. By doing so, the paper gives recognition to the thought-leaders in the accounting profession over the past 40 years—including both generalists and scholars making their mark in a specialized area (e.g., tax, auditing, or accounting practice). Following Glover, Prawitt, and Wood (2006), this set of journals includes six that are often classified as "elite"—Accounting Review (AR); Accounting, Organizations and Society (AOS); Contemporary Accounting Research (CAR); Journal of Accounting and Economics (JAE); Journal of Accounting Research (JAR); and Review of Accounting Studies (RAS)—and 9 other journals: Accounting Horizons (AH); Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory (AJPT); Behavioral Research in Accounting (BRA); Journal of Accounting and Public Policy (JAPP); Journal of Accounting Literature (JAL); Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance (JAAF); Journal of Business, Finance and Accounting (JBFA); Journal of the American Taxation Association (JATA); and the National Tax Journal (NTJ).
The results show that very few authors ultimately secure multiple hits in this set of high-impact journals, and the ones that do account for a disproportionate share of the total appearances across all 15 journals and in most of the individual journals. For example, only 7% of the authors have 8 or more appearances, and 18% have at least 4 appearances in the set of 15 journals. Yet, these individuals comprise 36.4% (authors with 8 or more appearances) and 57.5% (authors with at least 4 articles) of all appearances. The top 10 authors—by specific journal—account for over 8.5% of the total appearances at six outlets (JAE, RAS, AJPT, BRA, JAL, and JATA), and over 5% at 13 of the 15 journals. Furthermore, many of the authors appearing on one or more "top 10" lists have well-diversified research portfolios, with appearances in 5, 6, 7, or more of the journals. Thus, for a manuscript to gain acceptance at any of the top 15 journals, it must stack up favorably against works produced by the leading accounting scholars.
It is well known that publishing in the elite accounting journals is a tremendous accomplishment. The results in this study suggest that focusing on a small set of just four to six journals could shortchange the accomplishments of some researchers. Publications in the second tier of accounting journals appear to be anything but second rate.
