Finanse, Rynki Finansowe, Ubezpieczenia

Previously: Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego. Finanse, Rynki Finansowe, Ubezpieczenia


ISSN: 2450-7741    OAI    DOI: 10.18276/frfu.2018.94/1-21
CC BY-SA   Open Access 

Issue archive / 4/2018
Wykorzystanie psychologicznych koncepcji człowieka w badaniach rachunkowości zarządczej
(The use of psychological theories in management accounting research)

Authors: Bożena Nadolna
Zachodniopomorski Uniwersytet Szczeciński
Keywords: psychological concept of human cognitive theories; management accounting research; behavioral accounting
Data publikacji całości:2018
Page range:13 (243-255)
Cited-by (Crossref) ?:

Abstract

Purpose – The aim of the article is to present the scope of the use of psychological concepts in the research of management accounting, with particular emphasis on cognitive theory. An additional objective of the article is to organize knowledge in the field of managerial accounting research having its roots in psychological theories, as well as to indicate the need for an interdisciplinary approach to research in management accounting in order to better understand its mechanisms. Design/Methodology/Approach– An article written on the basis of the analysis of research results contained in the literature on the subject. The source analysis method was applied. Findings – The article describes the basic psychological concept of human and in their context, the management accounting research conducted mainly by foreign researchers of this discipline was discussed. Originality/Value – The article indicates the inspiration to conduct research in management accounting having its source in the psychological concepts of man.
Download file

Article file

Bibliography

1.Birnberg J.G., J. Luft, M.D. Shields (2006), Psychology Theory in Management Accounting, Research,Foundations of Trends in Accounting,vol.4, s. 124.
2.Buchheit, S. (2004), ‘Fixed cost magnitude, fixed cost reporting format,and competitive pricing decisions:Some experimental evidence’. Contemporary Accounting Research 21(1), 1–24.
3.Dickhaut J, S.Basu. K. McCabe, G Waymire (2010) Neuroaccounting: Consilience between the Biologically Evolved Brain and Culturally Evolved Accounting Principles,Accounting Horizons, vol.24, no 2.
4.Dobrołowicz W. (2006) Psychologia wyższych procesów poznawczych, Vizja PRESS&IT, Warszawa
5.Evans, J., R. Hannan, R. Krishnan, and D. Moser (2001), ‘Honesty in managerial reporting’. The Accounting Review, 76(4), 537–559.
6.Frederickson, J. R. and W. Waller (2005), ‘Carrot or stick? Contract frame and use of decision-influencing information in a principal-agent setting’. Journal of Accounting Research 43(5), 709–733.
7.Hannan, L., R. Krishnan, and A. Newman (2008), ‘The effects of disseminating relative performance feedback in tournament and individual performance compensation plans’. The Accounting Review 83(4), 893–913
8.Jaworska E. (2015) Poznawcze aspekty formułowania sądów i podejmowania decyzji w rachunkowości behawioralnej – wybrane zagadnienia., Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego, Finane, Rynki Finansowe, Ubezpieczenia, (89), s.130-138.
9.Jaworska E.(2014) Perspektywa behawioralna w rachunkowości w świetle wybranych teorii psychologii motywacji, Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego, Finane, Rynki Finansowe, Ubezpieczenia 830 (70) s.49-58.
10.Kozielecki J., (2000), Koncepcje psychologiczne człowieka, Wydawnictwo Akademickie “Żak”, Warszawa.
11.Korzeniowska D. (2017) Pionierzy i wybrane teorie istotne dla rozwoju rachunkowości behawioralnej, Zeszyty Teoretyczne Rachunkowości, t.92 (148), s.71-83.
12.Libby, T., S. Salterio, and A. Webb (2004), ‘The balanced scorecard: The effects of assurance and process accountability on managerial judgment’. The Accounting Review 79(4), 1075–1094.
13.Lipe, M. and S. Salterio (2000), ‘The balanced scorecard: Judgment effects of common and unique performance measures’. The Accounting Review, 75(3), 283–298.
14.Luft, J. (1994), ‘Bonus and penalty incentives: Contract choice by individuals’. Journal of Accounting and Economics 18(2), 181–206.
15.Luft J. M.D. Shields (2010), Psychology Models of Management Accounting, Foundations and Trends in Accounting. Vol 4, s. 199-345.
16.Marchant G., Robinson J., Anderson U. and Schadewald M. (1991), Analogical transfer and expertise in legal reasoning, „Organisanotional behavior and Human Decision Processes” no. 48.
17.Nadolna B. (2016) Wykorzystanie kategoryzacji w nauczaniu podstaw rachunkowości na uczelni, Folia Pomeranae Universitatis Technologiae Stetinensis. Oeconomica (83) s.181-190.
18.Nadolna B.(2015) Koszty utraconych korzyści jako element analizy decyzyjnej na bazie kosztów relewantnych w badaniach rachunkowości zarządczej Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego, nr 873, Finanse, Rynki Finansowe, Ubezpieczenia nr 77,333-340
19.Nęcka E.(1992) w: Psychologia i poznanie (1992) red. M. Materska, T. Tyszka, Warszawa PWN.
20.Psychologia poznawcza w trzech ostatnich dekadach XX wieku. (2007) red. Z. Chlewiński, Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne, Gdańsk.
21.Rachunkowość zarządcza.Teoria i praktyka. Aspekty behawioralne (2009) red. D.Dobija, M.Kucharczyk, Wydawnictwo Akademickie i Profesjonalne, Warszawa.
22.Vera-Munoz, S. (1998), ‘The effects of accounting knowledge and context on the omission of opportunity costs in resource-allocation decisions’. The Accounting Review 73(1), 47–72.
23.Vera-Munoz, S., W. Kinney, and S. Bonner (2001), ‘The effects of domain experience and task presentation format on accountants’ information relevance assurance’. The Accounting Review, 76(3), 405–429
24.Victoravich L.M. (2010), When do Opportunity Costs Count? Vague Opportunity Costs, Project Completion Stage and management Accounting Experience, „Behavioral Research in Accounting” American Accounting Association vol. 22, no. 1.