Measuring Reflective Cognitive Capacity: A Methodological Recommendation for Accounting Research of Feedback Effects

Author:

Viator Ralph E.1,Bagley Penelope L.2,Barnes Beau Grant3,Harp Nancy L.4

Affiliation:

1. Texas Tech University

2. Appalachian State University

3. Washington State University

4. Clemson University

Abstract

ABSTRACT: This study investigates whether measures of reflective cognitive capacity can differentiate which participants are more or less likely to benefit from feedback intervention. The results from four separate experiments of feedback effects are reported. In each experimental task, participants had to override a specific cognitive bias in order to improve their performance post feedback. Across all four experiments, the results consistently show that measures of reflective cognitive capacity reasonably partitioned participants into two groups: those that were more likely, versus those that were less likely, to benefit from feedback intervention. Most notably, the fourth experiment replicates a study recently published in Behavioral Research in Accounting (Buchheit, Dalton, Downen, and Pippin 2012) and demonstrates that the study's primary finding was not generalizable to all participants. We recommend that future accounting studies examining learning and feedback effects include measures of reflective cognitive capacity, such as the Need for Cognition scale and the Cognitive Reflection Test. Data Availability: Please contact the first author.

Publisher

American Accounting Association

Subject

Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management,Accounting

Reference59 articles.

1. Financial ratios, discriminant analysis, and the prediction of corporate bankruptcy;Altman;The Journal of Finance,1968

2. Reflection as a strategy to enhance task performance after feedback;Anseel;Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,2009

3. Functional fixation revisited: The effects of feedback and a repeated measures design on information processing changes in response to an accounting change;Arunachalam;Accounting, Organizations and Society,2002

4. Pressure and performance in accounting decision settings: Paradoxical effects of incentives, feedback, and justification;Ashton;Journal of Accounting Research,1990

5. Baron, J. 1985. Rationality and Intelligence. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.

Cited by 11 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

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