Jonathan E. Shipman

2.3k total citations · 1 hit paper
29 papers, 1.5k citations indexed

About

Jonathan E. Shipman is a scholar working on Accounting, Finance and Strategy and Management. According to data from OpenAlex, Jonathan E. Shipman has authored 29 papers receiving a total of 1.5k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 25 papers in Accounting, 9 papers in Finance and 7 papers in Strategy and Management. Recurrent topics in Jonathan E. Shipman's work include Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance (25 papers), Corporate Finance and Governance (14 papers) and Financial Markets and Investment Strategies (9 papers). Jonathan E. Shipman is often cited by papers focused on Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance (25 papers), Corporate Finance and Governance (14 papers) and Financial Markets and Investment Strategies (9 papers). Jonathan E. Shipman collaborates with scholars based in United States and Belgium. Jonathan E. Shipman's co-authors include Quinn Thomas Swanquist, Robert Lowell Whited, James Moon, Terry L. Neal, Lauren C. Reid, John L. Campbell, Joseph V. Carcello, James Chyz, Linda A. Myers and Ed deHaan and has published in prestigious journals such as The Accounting Review, Contemporary Accounting Research and Auditing A Journal of Practice & Theory.

In The Last Decade

Jonathan E. Shipman

24 papers receiving 1.5k citations

Hit Papers

Propensity Score Matching in Accounting Research 2016 2026 2019 2022 2016 250 500 750 1000

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Jonathan E. Shipman United States 10 1.3k 488 374 298 134 29 1.5k
Robert Lowell Whited United States 10 1.4k 1.1× 520 1.1× 416 1.1× 321 1.1× 151 1.1× 22 1.7k
Quinn Thomas Swanquist United States 10 1.4k 1.1× 524 1.1× 426 1.1× 322 1.1× 149 1.1× 22 1.7k
Omneya Abdelsalam United Kingdom 18 1.3k 1.0× 399 0.8× 410 1.1× 390 1.3× 208 1.6× 40 1.5k
Peter Iliev United States 19 1.4k 1.1× 482 1.0× 622 1.7× 310 1.0× 77 0.6× 30 1.6k
P. Eric Yeung United States 19 1.8k 1.4× 632 1.3× 764 2.0× 538 1.8× 157 1.2× 48 2.1k
Donghui Li China 23 1.3k 1.0× 510 1.0× 802 2.1× 671 2.3× 80 0.6× 87 1.9k
Marcus L. Caylor United States 12 1.8k 1.4× 897 1.8× 464 1.2× 197 0.7× 66 0.5× 21 2.0k
Muhammad Jahangir Ali Australia 21 1.3k 1.0× 747 1.5× 170 0.5× 185 0.6× 202 1.5× 73 1.6k
Chris Florackis United Kingdom 18 1.2k 0.9× 436 0.9× 482 1.3× 419 1.4× 39 0.3× 41 1.6k

Countries citing papers authored by Jonathan E. Shipman

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Jonathan E. Shipman's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Jonathan E. Shipman with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Jonathan E. Shipman more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Jonathan E. Shipman

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Jonathan E. Shipman. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Jonathan E. Shipman. The network helps show where Jonathan E. Shipman may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Jonathan E. Shipman

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Jonathan E. Shipman. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Jonathan E. Shipman based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with Jonathan E. Shipman. Jonathan E. Shipman is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Campbell, John L., et al.. (2025). Evidence on the decision usefulness of fair values in business combinations. Contemporary Accounting Research. 42(2). 922–952.
2.
Shipman, Jonathan E., et al.. (2023). Demand Uncertainty and the Production of Audit Services. Auditing A Journal of Practice & Theory. 43(3). 21–47. 1 indexed citations
3.
Moon, James, et al.. (2022). Client Consulting Opportunities and the Reemergence of Big 4 Consulting Practices: Implications for the Audit Market. The Accounting Review. 97(7). 135–168. 4 indexed citations
4.
Fang, Vivian W., et al.. (2022). Accounting for Cryptocurrencies. SSRN Electronic Journal. 12 indexed citations
5.
Shipman, Jonathan E., et al.. (2022). Did the PCAOB's 2009 Office Expansion Improve Audit Quality?*. Contemporary Accounting Research. 40(1). 89–119. 5 indexed citations
6.
Cassell, Cory A., et al.. (2021). Confirmation Bias and Auditor Risk Assessments: Archival Evidence. Auditing A Journal of Practice & Theory. 41(3). 67–93. 8 indexed citations
7.
Moon, James, Jonathan E. Shipman, Quinn Thomas Swanquist, & Robert Lowell Whited. (2021). On Controlling for Misstatement Risk. Auditing A Journal of Practice & Theory. 41(2). 191–210. 9 indexed citations
8.
Whited, Robert Lowell, Quinn Thomas Swanquist, Jonathan E. Shipman, & James Moon. (2021). Out of Control: The (Over) Use of Controls in Accounting Research. The Accounting Review. 97(3). 395–413. 99 indexed citations
9.
Moon, James, Jonathan E. Shipman, Quinn Thomas Swanquist, & Robert Lowell Whited. (2021). On Controlling for Misstatement Risk. SSRN Electronic Journal.
10.
Campbell, John L., et al.. (2020). Evidence on the Decision Usefulness of Fair Values in Business Combinations. SSRN Electronic Journal. 3 indexed citations
11.
Carcello, Joseph V., Terry L. Neal, Lauren C. Reid, & Jonathan E. Shipman. (2019). Auditor Independence and Fair Value Accounting: An Examination of Nonaudit Fees and Goodwill Impairments. Contemporary Accounting Research. 37(1). 189–217. 46 indexed citations
12.
Campbell, John L., et al.. (2019). Do financial analysts compel firms to make accounting decisions? Evidence from goodwill impairments. Review of Accounting Studies. 24(4). 1214–1251. 51 indexed citations
13.
Cassell, Cory A., et al.. (2018). The Effect of Confirmation Bias on Auditorss Risk Assessments: Archival Evidence. SSRN Electronic Journal. 1 indexed citations
14.
Myers, Linda A., Jonathan E. Shipman, Quinn Thomas Swanquist, & Robert Lowell Whited. (2018). Measuring the market response to going concern modifications: the importance of disclosure timing. Review of Accounting Studies. 23(4). 1512–1542. 40 indexed citations
15.
Cassell, Cory A., et al.. (2018). Should Uninformed Shareholders Vote? Evidence from Auditor Ratification. SSRN Electronic Journal. 4 indexed citations
16.
Moon, James, Jonathan E. Shipman, Quinn Thomas Swanquist, & Robert Lowell Whited. (2018). Do Clients Get What They Pay For? Evidence from Auditor and Engagement Fee Premiums. Contemporary Accounting Research. 36(2). 629–665. 19 indexed citations
17.
Moon, James, Jonathan E. Shipman, Quinn Thomas Swanquist, & Robert Lowell Whited. (2018). Do Clients Get What They Pay For? Evidence from Auditor and Engagement Fee Premiums. SSRN Electronic Journal. 3 indexed citations
18.
Neal, Terry L., et al.. (2016). Goodwill Accounting Under SFAS 142: Challenges for Auditors. SSRN Electronic Journal.
19.
Shipman, Jonathan E., Quinn Thomas Swanquist, & Robert Lowell Whited. (2016). Propensity Score Matching in Accounting Research. The Accounting Review. 92(1). 213–244. 1157 indexed citations breakdown →
20.
Swanquist, Quinn Thomas, Jonathan E. Shipman, & Robert Lowell Whited. (2014). Propensity Score Matching and Matched Sample Composition in Audit Research. SSRN Electronic Journal. 17 indexed citations

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026