پیوندهای مفید
اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 49 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 1,308 |
| تعداد مقالات | 11,245 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 23,474,683 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 15,804,560 |
تحلیل علمسنجی مقالات حوزه مسئولیت پاسخگویی: وضعیت فعلی، روندهای در حال ظهور | ||
| حسابداری دولتی | ||
| مقاله 6، دوره 12، شماره 2 - شماره پیاپی 25، خرداد 1405، صفحه 123-140 اصل مقاله (1.76 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30473/gaa.2026.74982.1817 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| قاسم بولو1؛ بهرنگ پارسافرد* 2 | ||
| 1دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران | ||
| 2دانشکده حسابداری و مدیریت، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| امروزه ایفای مسئولیت پاسخگویی عمومی به عنوان یکی از مسئولیتهای اصلی دولتها به شمار میرود.به دلیل اهمیت موضوع، حجم قابل توجهی از تلاشهای پژوهشی حوزه حسابداری بخش عمومی به توسعه ادبیات این بخش اختصاص پیدا کرده است در مرحله اول روش تحقیق، مقالات منتشرشده در زمینه مسئولیت پاسخگویی، شفافیت و پاسخگویی از پایگاه داده Scopus در بازه زمانی سالهای 1977 تا 2025 جمع آوری شد. در مرحله دوم، اسناد و مقالات پایش و 2028 مقاله انتخاب شده است. همچنین به منظور تحلیل مقالات از نرمافزار VOSviewer بهره گرفته شده است. یافتهها حاکی از وجود پنج جریان اصلی پژوهش مشتمل بر رابطه علم حسابداری و مسئولیت پاسخگویی، ارزیابی مسئولیت پاسخگویی، کفایت افشاء (به منظور ارزیابی نحوه ایفای مسئولیت پاسخگویی)، نقد و بررسی دیدگاههای محققین و انواع مدلهای ایفا و ارزیابی مسئولیت پاسخگویی میباشد . نتایج پژوهش حاکی از ورود رمزارزها (بیتکوین)، هوش مصنوعی، فناوری مالی (فین تک) و بلاکچین به ادبیات این حوزه بوده و اختصاص 14 درصد از کل استنادات 5 سال اخیر به کلیدواژههای مذکور، نشاندهنده اقبال روز افزون محققین به لاینهای تحقیقاتی نوظهور میباشد. همچنین نقش محوری کلید واژه مدیریت عمومی نوین در بسیاری از مقالات است که مبین تاثیر این پارادایم بر توسعه مسئولیت پاسخگویی است.انتظار میروند روند آتی تحقیقات حوزه مسئولیت پاسخگویی به سمت گرایشهای نوظهور مانند تاثیر هوشمصنوعی بر ایفا و ارزیابی مسئولیت پاسخگویی متمایل شود همچنین تاثیر هوشمصنوعی و بلاک چین بر ارتقاء خرده نظامهای نظام پاسخگویی مورد توجه خواهد بود. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| بخش عمومی؛ تحلیل علمسنجی؛ مسئولیت پاسخگویی؛ هوش مصنوعی | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| A scientometric analysis of Accountability literature: current status, emerging trends | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Ghassem Blue1؛ behrang parsafard2 | ||
| 1accounting & management faculty, allameh tabatabaei university, tehran. iran | ||
| 2accounting & management , allameh tabatabaei university, tehran, iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Today, fulfilling accountability is considered one of the main responsibilities of governments. Due to the importance of the subject, a significant amount of research efforts in the field of public sector accounting have been devoted to developing the literature in this sector. In the first stage of the research method, published articles in the field of accountability, transparency, and responsibility were collected from the Scopus database between 1977 and 2025. In the second stage, monitoring documents and articles were selected and 2028 articles were selected. VOSviewer software was also used to analyze the articles. The findings indicate the existence of five main streams of research, including the relationship between accounting science and accountability, assessing accountability, disclosure adequacy (in order to assess how accountability is fulfilled), critiquing and examining the views of researchers, and various models of accountability performance and assessment. The results of the study indicate that cryptocurrencies (Bitcoin), artificial intelligence, financial technology (FinTech), and blockchain have entered the literature of this field, and the allocation of 14% of all citations in the last 5 years to the aforementioned keywords indicates the increasing interest of researchers in emerging research lines. It is expected that the future trend of research will lean towards emerging trends such as the impact of artificial intelligence The impact of artificial intelligence and blockchain on the improvement of subsystems of the accountability system will also be considered. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Accountability, Artificial Intelligence, Public Sector, Scientometric Analysis | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Akhter, S; Pauyo, T. and Khan, M. (2019). What is the difference between a systematic review and a meta-analysis? Basic methods handbook for clinical orthopaedic research: apractical guide and case based research approach, 15(2), 331-342.
Appio, F. P; Cesaroni, F; and Di Minin, A. (2014). Visualizing the structure and bridges of the intellectual property management and strategy literature: a document co-citation analysis. Scientometrics, 10(1), 623-661.
Babajani, J. (2018). Advanced Public Sector Accounting with a Multi-Level Financial Reporting Approach. Tehran: Allameh Tabatabaei University, Second Edition, 612-616. (In Persian). https://lib.ui.ac.ir/dl/search/default.aspx?Term=131985&Field=0&DTC=1
Bovens, M. (2005). Public Accountability. In E. Ferlie, L. Lynne, & C. Pollitt (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Public Management (pp. 182–208). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Channuntapipat, C. (2018). Assurance for service organisations: contextualising accountability and trust. Managerial Auditing Journal, 33(4), 340-359.
Cobo, M. J; López‐Herrera, A. G; Herrera‐Viedma, E; and Herrera, F. (2011). Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology, 62(7), 1382-1402.
Coy, D; Fischer, M. and Gordon, T. (2001), “Public accountability: a new paradigm for college and university annual reports”. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 1-31.
https://doi.org/11.2288/10944281145626
Dillard, J; and Vinnari, E. (2019). Critical dialogical accountability: From accounting-based accountability to accountability-based accounting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 62, 16-38. https://doi.org/33.1111/2912/36137891
Dittenhofer, M. (2009). “Performance auditing in governments”. Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 16 No. 8, pp. 438-442. https://doi.org/14.2586/m10259871364
Donthu, N; Kumar, S; Mukherjee, D; Pandey, N; and Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of business research, 133, 285-296.
Faghihi, A. (2002). Accountability systems in the public sector (comparative perspective). Quarterly Journal of Management Studies, 46, 312-325. (In Persian)
https://doi.org/25.3312/s125-347-123.
Ghadimi, A. and Nizmand, M. R. (2013). Scientometric Software. Shiraz: Hamara Publications, First Edition. (In Persian). https://doi.org/88.1009/1097812536
Governmental accounting standards board Statement 34. (2004). www.GASB.org
Hjørland, B. (2013). Citation analysis: A social and dynamic approach to knowledge organization. Information Processing & Management, 49(6), 1313-1325.
Hood, C. (1995). The “new public management” in the 1980s: Variations on a theme. Accounting, organizations and society, 20(2-3), 93-109.
https://doi.org/11.1000/k175149850
Jamei. R, Ebrahimi. E, Rezaei Yamin. F, (2016). ‘Investigating the Response of the Accounting and Financial Reporting System in the Tax Organization of the Province of Kermanshah’. Governmental accounting, Vol.2, No.2 (69-80). (In Persian).
https://doi.org/01.47158/j124/359-7142
Karan, R. (2003). Selective Commercialisation of Public-Sector Accounting and its Consequences for Public Accountability. Australian Accounting Review, 13(3), 15-25.
https://doi.org/10.1177/s25347
Khanbashi, M. , zahedi, S. and M. Alvani, S. (2011). Accountability: The Basis for Public Trust Improvement. Quarterly of Order & Security Guards, 4(14), 29-54. (In Persian)
https://doi.org/41.3597/m1200002789
Lee, T. (2008). Credit in the box: An ode to market efficiency. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 21(1), 106-107. https://doi.org/11.1032/7153469/12
Levy, R. P. (1994). audit and accountability in a multi-agency environment: the case of the common agricultural policy in the uk. Financial Accountability & Management, 10(1).
doi: 25.1004/8762 3S.2014.235799.
Luke, B. (2016). Measuring and reporting on social performance: from numbers and narratives to a useful reporting framework for social enterprises. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, 36(2), 103-123.
doi: 10.1080/0969160 X.2015.1103298.
Masruki, R. and Hussainey, k. Aly, D. (2022). Stakeholder expectations of the accountability of Malaysian State Islamic Religious Councils (SIRCS): to whom and for what. Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 443-464.
https://doi: 1012.4752/1423/sd128759.
Metami, M; and Hassanpour, M. (2014). Investigating the Role of Mass Media in Improving the Level of Accountability of Government Organizations. Management Quarterly, 11 (34), 59-72. (In Persian).
doi: 10.10000/7534129h M.2417.12458.
Mohebi, E. , babajani, J. , salimi, J. and taghavi fard, M. T. (2024). Identifying users’ objectives and information needs of financial reports of regional electricity companies in Iran. Governmental Accounting, 10(1),110-93. (In Persian)
doi: 11.1111/7795415 B.2015.7753125.
Moher, D; Liberati, A; Tetzlaff, J; Altman, D. G. & PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Annals of internal medicine, 151(4), 264-269.
Mulgan, R. (2000), “‘Accountability’: An Ever – Expanding Concept?” Discussion Paper No. 72, ANU Public Policy Program.
https://doi.org/11.1177/2758942361
O'Dwyer, B; & Boomsma, R. (2015). The co-construction of NGO accountability: Aligning imposed and felt accountability in NGO-funder accountability relationships. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 28(1), 36-68. https://doi.org/12.7812/s1423579
Oliveira, J; Rodrigues, L. L; & Craig, R. (2011). Risk‐related disclosures by non‐finance companies: Portuguese practices and disclosure characteristics. Managerial Auditing Journal, 26(9), 817-839. https://doi.org/77.1000/10944281145626
Roberts, J. (1991). The possibilities of accountability. Accounting, organizations and society, 16(4), 355-368.
https://doi.org/10.1111/4587893s.1245
Romzek, B; and Dubnick, M. (1987) Accountability in the Public Sector: Lessons from the Challenger Tragedy. Public Administration Review 47, 223. https://doi.org/11.2578/1m14357892
Roya, S; Yetano, A. and Garciz-Lacalle, J. (2019). Accountability Styles in tate-Owned enterprises: The good, the bad, the ugly ... And the pretty. Spanish accounting Review. 22(2), 156-170.
https://doi.org/10.1177/s10944281145626
Ryan, C; and Mack, J. (2006). Reflections on the Theoretical Underpinning of General Purpose Financial Reports of Australian Government Departments. Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal, 24, 559-580. https://doi.org/10.1177/m4758912
San Miguel, J. G; Shank, J. K; and Govindarajan, V. (1977). Extending corporate accountability: a survey and framework for analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 2(4), 333-347. https://doi.org/10.8888/X10944281145626
Secinaro, S; Lanzalonga, F; Oppioli, M; and de Nuccio, E. (2025). The effects of disruptive technologies on accountability in fintech industry: using bibliometric analysis to develop a research agenda. Research in International Business and Finance, 102816.
doi.org/10.77/111.s10944281145626
Strozzi, F; Colicchia, C; Creazza, A; and Noè, C. (2017). Literature review on the ‘Smart Factory’concept using bibliometric tools. International journal of production research, 55(22), 6572-6591.
https://doi.org/85/253/a1243589
Tofangsaz, A; Sotudeh, R. Gord, A. and Haghparast, A. (2024). Presenting a Performance-based Budgeting Model and Evaluating its Impact on Performance Accountability. Governmental Accounting, 11(1), 131-146. (In Persian) https://doi.org/10.91452/1k2539
Unerman, J; and O'Dwyer, B. (2006). Theorising accountability for NGO advocacy. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 19(3), 349-376. doi.org/10.5812/7589.sm253
Yetano, A; and Sorrentino, D. (2023). Accountability disclosure of SOEs: comparing hybrid and private European news agencies. Meditari accountancy research, 2, 294-319.
doi.org/10.1177/712356
Zakeri, M; Asadi, I. and Lotfi, H. (2011). Explaining the accountability and supervision model of the administrative system in the Alawi government from the perspective of the relationship between bureaucracy and democracy. Public policy-making in management,2(4), 18-1. (In Persian) https://doi.org/11.2278.jy2364589
Zupic, I. and Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational research methods, 18(3), 429-472
https://doi.org/10.1177/10944281145626
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 218 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 76 |
||