BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF THE POSTGRADUATE THESES WRITTEN IN TURKEY ON ACCOUNTING QUALITY

Öz

In this bibliometric analysis, 69 postgraduate theses written in Turkey on accounting quality, available at CoHE National Thesis Center, were examined in terms of subject, year, institution, author, advisor, language, type, scope, method, number of pages, number and frequency of keywords. SPSS and Excel were used to process the data, and quantitative descriptive analysis methods of frequency and percentage were used for the analysis. As a result, it was found that the theses were written mostly in Turkish (85.5%) on "earnings management (37.7%)" and generally at Marmara University (11.6%) in 2019; most of them (65.2%) were carried out within the context of the businesses in BIST 100; all of them were conducted using a quantitative research method; and SPSS (36.2%) was the most commonly used statistical program. It was also found that 56.5% of the thesis advisers were professors; 30.4% of the theses had a page number ranging from 101 to 150; 26.1% of the theses included 4 keywords; and "earnings management" (28 times) was the most common keyword.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Accounting Quality
• Bibliometric Analysis
• Postgraduate Theses

MUHASEBE KALİTESİ KONUSU KAPSAMINDA TÜRKİYE’DE YAZILAN LİSANSÜSTÜ TEZLERİN BİBLİYOMETRİK ANALİZİ

Öz

Muhasebe kalitesi konusunda Türkiye’de yazılan lisansüstü tezlerin bibliyometrik analizinin yapıldığı bu çalışmada YÖK Ulusal Tez Merkezi’ndeki erişime açık 69 tez konu, yıl, kurum, yazar, danışman, dil, tür, kapsam, yöntem, sayfa sayısı, anahtar kelime sayısı ve sıklığı açısından incelenmiştir. Verilerin işlenmesinde SPSS ve Excel, analizinde ise nicel betimsel analiz yöntemlerinden frekans ve yüzde analizleri kullanılmıştır. Sonuçta en fazla tezin (%37,7) “kâr yönetimi” konusunda, Türkçe (%85,5) ve genellikle 2019 yılında, Marmara Üniversitesi’nde (%11,6) yazıldığı; BIST 100’e kayıtlı işletmeleri (%65,2) kapsadığı ve tezlerin tamamında nicel araştırma yapıldığı; SPSS’nin (%36,2) en çok kullanılan istatistiksel program olduğu görülmüştür. Danışmanların %56,5’inin Prof. Dr. unvanlı olduğu; tezlerin %30,4’ünün sayfa sayısının 101-150 arasında olduğu; %26,1’nin 4 anahtar kelimeye yer verdiği ve “kâr yönetimi”nin (28 kez) en çok tekrar eden anahtar kelime olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Muhasebe Kalitesi
• Bibliyometrik Analiz
• Lisansüstü Tezler

Kaynakça

1. Aktaş, H. (2009). Hisse senetleri piyasasında muhasebe bilgilerinin önemi (Gazi Kitab).
2. Al, U. (2008). Türkiye’nin Bilimsel Yayın Politikası: Atıf Dizinlerine Dayalı Bibliyometrik Bir Yaklaşım. (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.Ankara.
3. Al, U., & Tonta, Y. (2004). Atıf analizi: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Kütüphanecilik Bölümü tezlerinde atıf yapılan kaynaklar. Bilgi Dünyası, 5(1), 19–47. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi www.isinet.com
4. Alexander, D., & Nobes, C. (2007). Financial Accounting: an international introduction (Pearson Ed).
5. Alkan, G. (2014). Türkiye’de Muhasebe Alanında Yapılan Lisansüstü Tez Çalışmaları Üzerine Bir Araştırma (1984-2012). Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi, (61), 41–52. https://doi.org/10.25095/mufad.396448
6. Alkan, G., & Özkaya, H. (2015). Türk Muhasebe ve Finans Yazınının SSCI’da 20 Yılı. Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi, (66), 175–192. https://doi.org/10.25095/mufad.396538
7. Armstrong, C. S., Glaeser, S., & Kepler, J. D. (2019). Accounting quality and the transmission of monetary policy. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 68(2–3), 101265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2019.101265
8. Baker, C. R., & Barbu, E. M. (2007). Trends in research on international accounting harmonization. The International Journal of Accounting, 42(3), 272–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.INTACC.2007.06.003

9. Barth, M. E., Landsman, W. R., & Lang, M. H. (2008). International accounting standards and accounting quality. Journal of Accounting Research, 46(3), 467–498. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-679X.2008.00287.x
10. Bartov, E., Goldberg, S. R., & Kim, M. (2005). Comparative value relevance among German, U.S., and international accounting standards: A German stock market perspective. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, 20(2), 95–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0148558X0502000201
11. Beatty, A., Liao, S., & Weber, J. (2010). Financial Reporting Quality, Private Information, Monitoring, and the Lease-versus-Buy Decision. The Accounting Review American Accounting Association, 85(4), 1215–1238. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2010.85.4.1215
12. Bharath, S. T., Sunder, J., & Sunder, S. V. (2008). Accounting quality and debt contracting. Accounting Review, 83(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2008.83.1.1
13. Biddle, G. C., & Hilary, G. (2006). Accounting quality and firm-level capital investment. Accounting Review, 81(5), 963–982. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2006.81.5.963
14. Bonner, S. E., Hesford, J. W., Van der Stede, W. A., & Young, S. M. (2006). The most influential journals in academic accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(7), 663–685. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AOS.2005.06.003
15. Callen, J. L., Khan, M., & Lu, H. (2013). Accounting Quality, Stock Price Delay, and Future Stock Returns*. Wiley Online Library, 30(1), 269–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.2011.01154.x
16. Can, A. V. (2010). Krizin Muhasebesi ve Muhasebenin Krizi. Mali Çözüm Dergisi, 97.
17. Can, A. V., Küçüker, M., & Özkan, İ. (2020). 2016-2019 Yılları Arasında Düzenlenen Uluslararası Muhasebe ve Finans Araştırmaları Kongrelerinde Sunulan Bildirilerin Analizi. Muhasebe ve Finans İncelemeleri Dergisi, 3(1), 65–77. https://doi.org/10.32951/mufider.703665
18. Cascino, S., Pugliese, A., Mussolino, D., & Sansone, C. (2010). The Influence of Family Ownership on the Quality of Accounting Information. Family Business Review, 23(3), 246–265. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486510374302
19. Chaney, P. K., Faccio, M., & Parsley, D. (2011). The quality of accounting information in politically connected firms. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 51(1–2), 58–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2010.07.003
20. Chen, D., Liu, M., Ma, T., & Martin, X. (2017). Accounting quality and trade credit. Accounting Horizons, 31(3), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-51711
21. Chen, H., Tang, Q., Jiang, Y., & Lin, Z. (2010). The role of international financial reporting standards in accounting quality: Evidence from the European Union. Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting, 21(3), 220–278. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-646X.2010.01041.x
22. Choi, F. D., & Meek, G. K. (2008). International accounting (Pearson Ed).
23. Christensen, H. B., Lee, E., Walker, M., & Zeng, C. (2015). Incentives or Standards: What Determines Accounting Quality Changes around IFRS Adoption? European Accounting Review, 24(1), 31–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2015.1009144
24. Çil Koçyiğit, S., Çına Bal, E., & Öztürk, V. (2009). 1975 – 2008 Yılları Arasında Türkiye’de Muhasebe Alanında Yazılan Doktora Tezlerinin Değerlendirilmesi. Içinde XXVIII. Türkiye Muhasebe Eğitimi Sempozyumu. İzmir.
25. Çil Koçyiğit, S., & Şenay, F. (2018). 1978-2018 Yılları Arasında Türkiye’de Sağlık Yönetimi Anabilim Dalı/Bilim Dalında Muhasebe ve Finansman Alanında Yazılan Lisansüstü Tezlerin Değerlendirilmesi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 21(2), 303–312. https://doi.org/10.29249/selcuksbmyd.467473
26. Coyne, J., Summers, S. L., Williams, B., & Wood, D. A. (2010). Accounting program research rankings by topical area and methodology. Issues in Accounting Education, 25(4), 631–654. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi https://meridian.allenpress.com/iae/article-abstract/25/4/631/73259
27. Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative.
28. Cussatt, M., Huang, L., & Pollard, T. J. (2018). Accounting quality under u.S. gaap versus ifrs: The case of germany. Journal of International Accounting Research, 17(3), 21–41. https://doi.org/10.2308/jiar-51997
29. Dayanandan, A., Donker, H., Ivanof, M., & Karahan, G. (2016). IFRS and accounting quality: Legal origin, regional, and disclosure impacts. International Journal of Accounting and Information Management, 24(3), 296–316. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJAIM-11-2015-0075
30. Dechow, P. M., & Dichev, I. D. (2002). The quality of accruals and earnings: The role of accrual estimation errors. Accounting Review, 77(SUPPL.), 35–59. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2002.77.s-1.35
31. Demir, V., Ertuğrul, M., & Gür, E. (2016). Değer i̇li̇şki̇si̇ üzeri̇ne uluslararasi yayinlar. Mali Çözüm, 26(Jul/Aug), 13–32.
32. Dinç, E., & Atabay, E. (2018). Türkiye’deki Denetim Literatürünün İçerik Analizi (2007–2016). Muhasebe ve Denetime Bakış, 0(53), 101–114.
33. Diri, M. El. (2018). Introduction to earnings management. Introduction to Earnings Management. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62686-4
34. Doğan, D. (2020). Entegre Raporlama Kanusunda YÖK Tez ve ULAKBİLİM Veri Tabanındaki Akademik Çalışmalar Üzerine Bir Bibliyometrik Analiz (2010-2020). Uluslararası Muhasebe ve Finans Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(2), 120–142.
35. Dönmez, G., Tosunoğlu, B., & Cengiz, D. D. S. (2020). A Bibliometrıc Research On National and International Journals On Audit Quality. The Journal of International Scientific Researches, 5(Ek), 78–86. https://doi.org/10.23834/isrjournal.839005
36. Donohue, J. C. (1972). A bibliometric analysis of certain information science literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 23(5), 313–317. https://doi.org/10.1002/ASI.4630230506
37. Durgut, M., & Pehlivan, A. (2018). Muhasebe (Finansal Raporlama) Standartlarına Yönelik Türkiye’de Hazırlanan Lisansüstü Tez Çalışmaları Üzerine Bir Araştırma: 1987-2017 Dönemi. Muhasebe ve Vergi Uygulamaları Dergisi, Özel(Nisan), 1–23.
38. Efil, İ. (2010). Toplam Kalite Yönetimi (Dora Basım).
39. Emir, S., Kıymık, H., & Apalı, A. (2020). Muhasebe Alanında Yürütülen Çalışmaların Nitel İçerik Analizi Tekniğiyle Değerlendirilmesi. Mali Çözüm Dergisi, 30(162), 95–126.
40. Erbaşı, A., Cabi, A., Gümrah, A., & Hakses, H. (2017). Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi’nin Bibliyometrik Analizi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 20(2), 206–214. https://doi.org/10.29249/selcuksbmyd.356894
41. Erdamar, C., & Sarıoğlu, K. (2009). XXVIII. Türkiye Muhasebe Eğitimi Sempozyumu. Içinde Ülkemizde Muhasebe Alanında Son Yirmi Yılda (1988-2007) Kabul Edilen Yüksek Lisans ve Doktora Tezlerinin Konularına Göre Dağılımı (ss. 143–157).
42. Finansal Raporlamaya İlişkin Kavramsal Çerçeve. (2018). Tarihinde adresinden erişildi https://www.kgk.gov.tr/Portalv2Uploads/files/Duyurular/v2/TFRS/Finansal Raporlamaya İlişkin Kavramsal Çerçeve .pdf
43. Fu, H. Z., Ho, Y. S., Sui, Y. M., & Li, Z. S. (2010). A bibliometric analysis of solid waste research during the period 1993-2008. Waste Management, 30(12), 2410–2417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2010.06.008
44. García Lara, J. M., García Osma, B., Mora, A., & Scapin, M. (2017). The monitoring role of female directors over accounting quality. Journal of Corporate Finance, 45, 651–668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2017.05.016
45. Gençoğlu, Ü. G., & Ertan, Y. (2012). Muhasebe Kalitesini Etkileyen Faktörler ve Türkiye’deki Durum. Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi, (53), 1–24. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi http://dergipark.gov.tr/mufad/issue/35632/396089
46. Gerakos, J. (2012). Discussion of Detecting Earnings Management: A New Approach. Journal of Accounting Research, 50(2), 335–347. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-679X.2012.00452.x
47. Goetsch, D. L., & Davis, S. B. (2016). Quality management for organizational excellence (Upper Sadd).
48. Grant, J., Cottrell, R., Fawcett, G., & Cluzeau, F. (2000). Evaluating “payback” on biomedical research from papers cited in clinical guidelines: Applied bibliometric study. British Medical Journal, 320(7242), 1107–1111. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7242.1107
49. Güleç, Ö. F., & Öztürk, E. (2019). Muhasebe Alanında Türkiye’deki Tezlerle Uluslararası Alan Endekslerinde Taranan Dergilerde Yayınlanan Makalelerin Karşılaştırılması. Muhasebe ve Vergi Uygulamaları Dergisi, 12(2), 215–236. https://doi.org/10.29067/muvu.430404
50. Gürbüz, C., Kıymık, H., & Bitlis, F. (2021). Türkiye’de Muhasebe Eğitimi Konusunda Yapılan Akademik Çalışmaların Bibliyometrik Analizi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 24(1), 173–186. https://doi.org/10.29249/selcuksbmyd.889078
51. Harrison, W. T., Horngren, C. T., & Thomas (Bill), C. W. (2014). Financial Accounting (Tenth Edition). Pearson.
52. HassabElnaby, H. R., Epps, R. W., & Said, A. A. (2003). The impact of environmental factors on accounting development: An Egyptian longitudinal study. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 14(3), 273–292. https://doi.org/10.1006/cpac.2002.0530
53. Healy, P. M., & Wahlen, J. M. (1999, Aralık). A review of the earnings management literature and its implications for standard setting. Accounting Horizons. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch.1999.13.4.365
54. Hogston, R. (1995). Quality nursing care: a qualitative enquiry. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 21(1), 116–124. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1995.21010116.x
55. Hotamışlı, M., & Erem, I. (2014). Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi’nde Yayınlanan Makalelerin Bibliyometrik Analizi. Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi, (63), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.25095/mufad.396474
56. Hribar, P., Kravet, T., & Wilson, R. (2014). A new measure of accounting quality. Review of Accounting Studies, 19(1), 506–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-013-9253-8
57. https://www.yok.gov.tr. (2020). Tarihinde adresinden erişildi https://www.yok.gov.tr/Sayfalar/Haberler/2021/yok-un-tez-merkezinden-faydalanan-kullanici-sayisi-6-milyona-ulasti.aspx
58. Iatridis, G. E. (2011). Accounting disclosures, accounting quality and conditional and unconditional conservatism. International Review of Financial Analysis, 20(2), 88–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2011.02.013
59. Jones, J. J. (1991). Earnings Management During Import Relief Investigations. Journal of Accounting Research, 29(2), 193–228. https://doi.org/10.2307/2491047
60. Kalyane, V. L., & Sen, B. K. (1995). Bibliometric study of the Journal of Oilseeds Research. Annals of Library Science and Documentation, 42(4), 121–141. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi http://eprints.rclis.org/4780/1/K-41.pdf
61. Kaya, H. P. (2019). Türkiye’de Denetim Alanında Yazılmış Olan Doktora Tezlerinin Değerlendirilmesi (1995-2018). Karabük Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 9(2), 556–576. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/joiss/629439
62. Kent Baker, H., Pandey, N., Kumar, S., & Haldar, A. (2020). A bibliometric analysis of board diversity: Current status, development, and future research directions. Journal of Business Research, 108(November 2019), 232–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.025
63. Kim, H., & Yasuda, Y. (2019). Accounting information quality and guaranteed loans: evidence from Japanese SMEs. Small Business Economics, 53(4), 1033–1050. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-018-0106-5
64. Kıymetli Şen, İ., Hatunoğlu, Z., & Terzi, S. (2017). Muhasebe Araştırmalarında Muhasebe Eğitiminin Yeri ve Önemi: Muhasebe Dergileri Üzerinde Bibliyometrik Bir Araştırma. Muhasebe Bilim Dünyası Dergisi, 19(1), 247–291.
65. Koehler, W. (2001). Information science as" Little Science": The implications of a bibliometric analysis of theJournal of the American Society for Information Science. Scientometrics, 51(1), 117–132. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi https://akjournals.com/view/journals/11192/51/1/article-p117.xml
66. Kurt, G., & Uçma, T. (2011). Türkiye’deki Muhasebe Araştırmaları Yazını. World of Accounting Science, 4, 69–95. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi https://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=35934528-e525-4d4a-899c-1cdb3741c3d9%40sdc-v-sessmgr02
67. Lemma, T. T., Shabestari, M. A., Freedman, M., & Mlilo, M. (2020). Corporate carbon risk exposure, voluntary disclosure, and financial reporting quality. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(5), 2130–2143. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2499
68. Leung, X. Y., Sun, J., & Bai, B. (2017). Bibliometrics of social media research: A co-citation and co-word analysis. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 66, 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.06.012
69. Li, N., Lou, Y., Otto, C. A., & Wittenberg-Moerman, R. (2021). Accounting Quality and Debt Concentration. Accounting Review, 96(1), 377–400. https://doi.org/10.2308/TAR-2017-0250
70. Marquardt, C., & Zur, E. (2015). The role of accounting quality in the M&A market. Management Science, 61(3), 604–623. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2013.1873
71. Mcnichols, M. F., Stubben, S. R., Mcnichols, M. F., & Stubben, S. R. (2015). The effect of target-firm accounting quality on valuation in acquisitions. Rev Account Stud, 20, 110–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-014-9283-x
72. Melin, G., & Persson, O. (1996). Studying research collaboration using co-authorships. akjournals.com, 36(3), 363–377. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi https://akjournals.com/view/journals/11192/36/3/article-p363.xml
73. Merigó, J. M., & Yang, J. B. (2017). Accounting Research: A Bibliometric Analysis. Australian Accounting Review, 27(1), 71–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/auar.12109
74. Mueller, G. G. (1968). Accounting Principles Generally Accepted in the United States Versus Those Generally Accepted Elsewhere. International Journal of Accounting, Education and Research, Spring, 34–52.
75. Mutlu, S. (2020). Accounting quality and the choice of borrowing base restrictions in debt contracts. Accounting and Business Research, 50(2), 135–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2019.1683440
76. Nalçın, K., & Can, A. V. (2016). Bilgi Felsefesi Temelinde Muhasebe Araştırmalarının Yönelimi: 2006-2012 Yılları Arasında Türkiye’de Yapılan Doktora Tezlerinin Analizi. Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(4), 2006–2012.
77. Nikolaev, V. V. (2014). Identifying Accounting Quality. SSRN Electronic Journal, (Nikolaev 2014). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2484958
78. Nobes, C., & Parker, R. H. (2016). Comparative international accounting (Pearson Ed).
79. Oler, D. K., Oler, M. J., & Skousen, C. J. (2010). Characterizing accounting research. Accounting Horizons, 24(4), 635–670.
80. Önce, S., & Başar, B. (2010). Türkiye’deki akademik araştırma dergilerinde muhasebe alanında yazılmış makalelerin analizi: 2000-2008, 55–69.
81. Öztürk, O., & Gürler, G. (2021). Bir Literatür İncelemesi Aracı Olarak Bibliyometrik Analiz (Ed.) (Nobel).
82. Pinto, M., Escalona-Fernández, M. I., & Pulgarin, A. (2013). Information literacy in social sciences and health sciences: a bibliometric study (1974–2011). Springer, 95(3), 1071–1094. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0899-y
83. Prather‐Kinsey, J. J., & Rueschhoff, N. G. (2004). An analysis of international accounting research in US‐and non‐US‐based academic accounting journals. Journal of International Accounting Research, 3(1), 63–81. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi https://meridian.allenpress.com/jiar/article-abstract/3/1/63/462303
84. Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics. Journal of documentation, 4(25), 348–349.
85. Ran, G., Fang, Q., Luo, S., & Chan, K. C. (2015). Supervisory board characteristics and accounting information quality: Evidence from China. International Review of Economics and Finance, 37, 18–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2014.10.011
86. Sakin, T. (2008). A Content analysis of papers published in the Journal of School of Business Administration: Accounting and finance (1972-2007). İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi Istanbul University Journal of the School of Business Administration Cilt, 37(1), 13–21. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi www.ifdergisi.org
87. Sánchez, A. D., de la Cruz Del Río Rama, M., & García, J. Á. (2017). Bibliometric analysis of publications on wine tourism in the databases Scopus and WoS. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 23(1), 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2016.02.001
88. Selimoğlu, S. K., & Uzay, Ş. (2007). Türkiye’de Son 10 Yılda Bağımsız Denetim Alanında Yapılan Araştırmalar: Literatür Taraması. Mali Çözüm Dergisi, 83(Eylül-Ekim), 39–52.
89. Şentürk, F., & Fındık, H. (2015). Türkiye’deki Akademik Araştırma Dergilerinde 2005-2014 Döneminde Muhasebe Alanında Yazılmış Makalelerin Literatür Taraması ve İçerik Analizi. Muhasebe Bilim Dünyası Dergisi, 17(2), 413–436. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/mbdd/761304
90. Sevilengül, O. (2009). Genel Muhasebe (Gazi Kitab).
91. Soderstrom, N. S., & Sun, K. J. (2007). IFRS adoption and accounting quality: A review. European Accounting Review, 16(4), 675–702. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180701706732
92. Spiceland, C. P., Yang, L. L., & Zhang, J. H. (2016). Accounting quality, debt covenant design, and the cost of debt. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 47(4), 1271–1302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11156-015-0538-9
93. van Tendeloo, B., & Vanstraelen, A. (2005). Earnings management under German GAAP versus IFRS. European Accounting Review, 14(1), 155–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/0963818042000338988
94. Verdi, R. S., Beatty, P., Blouin, J., Bushee, B., Cassar, G., Franco, F., … Zhuang, Z. (2006). Financial Reporting Quality and Investment Efficiency.
95. Vogel, R., & Güttel, W. H. (2012). The Dynamic Capability View in Strategic Management: A Bibliometric Review. Wiley Online Library, 15(4), 426–446. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12000
96. Web of Science. (2021). https://access.clarivate.com/.
97. Wouters, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (1994). Has Price’s dream come true: Is scientometrics a hard science? Scientometrics, 31(2), 193–222. Tarihinde adresinden erişildi https://akjournals.com/view/journals/11192/31/2/article-p193.xml
98. Wu, J., Xiong, F., & Li, C. (2019). Application of internet of things and blockchain technologies to improve accounting information quality. IEEE Access, 7, 100090–100098. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2930637
99. Yeşil, T., & Akyüz, F. (2018). Muhasebe Alanındaki Ulusal Doktora Tezlerinin Bibliyometrik Analizi. Muhasebe Bilim Dünyası Dergisi, 20(Özel), 440–472.
100. Yüce, A., & Muğan, C. Ş. (1996). Dünyada ve Türkiye’de 1990 – 1995 Arası Yapılan Muhasebe Doktora Tezlerinin Analizi ve Öneriler. Içinde Türkiye XV. Muhasebe Eğitimi Sempozyumu.
101. Yücel, S., Öncü, M. A., & Kartal, O. (2015). Türkiye ’ de Muhasebe Ve Finansal Raporlama Standartları Konularında Yayınlanmış Akademik Çalışmalar ( 2007- 2014 Arası Literatür Taraması ). Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi, (Ekim), 39–66.
102. Zeff, S. A., & Dyckman, T. R. (2020). Accounting and Business Research: the first 50 years, 1970–2019. Accounting and Business Research, 50(4), 360–395.
103. Zhang, D. (2019). Top management team characteristics and financial reporting quality. Accounting Review, 94(5), 349–375. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-52360
104. Zhong, S., Geng, Y., Liu, W., Gao, C., & Chen, W. (2016). A bibliometric review on natural resource accounting during 1995–2014. Journal of Cleaner Production, 139, 122–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.039
105. Zyznarska-Dworczak, B. (2018). The development perspectives of sustainable management accounting in Central and Eastern European countries. Sustainability, 10(5), 1445. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051445