To be or not to be in the sample? On using manipulation checks in experimental accounting research

Author:

Kotzian Peter,Stoeber Thomas,Hoos Florian,Weissenberger Barbara E.

Abstract

Purpose Manipulation checks are a recommended for experimental accounting research. Usage of information gained by manipulation checks varies. In some studies, participants who failed the manipulation check are removed from the sample. Other studies report the results of the manipulation checks but still use the full sample. Some authors recommend removing participants who failed the manipulation check as a means to increase the power of the statistical analysis. Others warn that removing these participants endangers the randomization as a crucial precondition for gaining valid insights from experimental research. Until now, there is little research on how sensitive results react to exclusion of participants. The purpose of this paper is to study the effects of removing participants failing the manipulation checks on the evaluation of a hypothesis and the development of alternative usages of the information gained from manipulation checks. Design/methodology/approach Based on an analytical model and a simulation, the authors show how removing participants who fail the manipulation check affects experimental findings. Findings Simulations show that statistical results and conclusions drawn from an experiment differ substantially, depending on whether participants who failed the manipulation check are removed from the sample. As the participants who are removed are no random sub-sample, but share a certain property, the experimental results react strongly, typically showing significant results, where there are actually none. Originality/value This paper is, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, the first to address the sensitivity of experimental results to removing participants who fail the manipulation check from the sample and the implications for the validity of conclusions drawn from experimental accounting research. This paper’s contribution is a better way of using information gained in the manipulation check in the statistical analysis of the experimental data.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Finance,Accounting

Reference33 articles.

1. The effect of superiors’ exogenous constraints on budget negotiations;The Accounting Review,2015

2. A note on dropping experimental subjects who fail a manipulation check;Political Analysis,2019

3. The effect of framing and negotiation partner’s objective on judgments about negotiated transfer prices;Accounting, Organizations and Society,2008

4. The effects of incentive subjectivity and strategy communication on knowledge-sharing and extra-role behaviours;Management Accounting Research,2014

5. A commentary on sample design issues in behavioral accounting experiments;Accounting Research Journal,2006

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3