Reference no: EM131199086
Accounting Standards
Guidelines for Literature Critiques
Students must submit a critique of the following academic articledeemed to be seminal to their main area of research. Details about the format, structure and assessment criteria for the critique are presented below.
Academic article
Towards a Positive Theory of the Determination of Accounting Standards
Author(s): Ross L. Watts and Jerold L. Zimmerman
Source: The Accounting Review, Vol. 53, No. 1 (Jan., 1978), pp. 112-134Published by: American Accounting Association
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/245729
FORMAT: 2000 words (maximum)
The critique submission should be typed. Work should be double-spaced with a 2.4cm margin on all sides. Use only one side of each sheet of paper.
STRUCTURE:
While there is room for being innovative, most critiques should include the following:
• Cover Page
• Introduction: Introducing the topic, stating the aims of the critique, outlining the main argument to be presented and an overview of the paper and the structure of the paper to follow.
• Summary of the Article: Focusing on its main argument, including its aims, its overall findings and its theoretical arguments and contribution.
• Research Question: Identifying the article's research question(s) or hypotheses and discussing its value, explaining whether and how it flowed from the literature review.
• Theoretical Framework: Identifying and discussing the theoretical framework or theoretical substance of the paper leading to the research element.
• The Significance and Limitations of the Article: Use the literature to discuss the limitations of the theory and methodology used. Does the author acknowledge these limitations? Does the author draw theoretical conclusions from the research that are justified by the methodology? How do these limitations affect the significance of the article and the contribution it makes to the discipline, particularly the findings set against the research method?
• Conclusions: Summarising the main points and drawing implications of your critique.