arbiter
JournalsAccount

The Future of Accounting History: Methods, Topics, and Engagement

Martin Persson & Vaughan S. Radcliffe

Accounting Historians Journal2025https://doi.org/10.2308/aahj-2024-026article
AJG 2ABDC B
Weight
0.50

Abstract

This article advocates for a future in accounting history that encompasses a broader range of research topics. It suggests that accounting historians should explore a diversity of subjects, including those of interest to accounting researchers who may not typically engage with historical scholarship. Using four articles from generalist accounting journals on accounting history, we develop a model to guide future research in the field of accounting history. This model emphasizes rigorous archival and oral history research, theoretical pluralism, and engagement with broader accounting concerns, making a case for the relevance of historical inquiry in contemporary accounting discourse. By integrating these elements, we aim to inspire accounting historians to produce work that not only enriches historical understanding but also resonates with and informs the broader accounting field.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2308/aahj-2024-026

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{martin2025,
  title        = {{The Future of Accounting History: Methods, Topics, and Engagement}},
  author       = {Martin Persson & Vaughan S. Radcliffe},
  journal      = {Accounting Historians Journal},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2308/aahj-2024-026},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

The Future of Accounting History: Methods, Topics, and Engagement

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.