A Review of the Earnings Management Literature and its Implications for Standard Setting

Abstract

loading...

About

This paper, published in 1950, received 562 indexed citations. Written by Paul M. Healy and James M. Wahlen covering the research area of Strategy and Management and Accounting. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Accounting (453 citations), Strategy and Management (361 citations) and Gender Studies (101 citations). Published in SSRN Electronic Journal.

Countries where authors are citing A Review of the Earnings Management Literature and its Implications for Standard Setting

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of A Review of the Earnings Management Literature and its Implications for Standard Setting. 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 A Review of the Earnings Management Literature and its Implications for Standard Setting with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites A Review of the Earnings Management Literature and its Implications for Standard Setting more than expected).

Fields of papers citing A Review of the Earnings Management Literature and its Implications for Standard Setting

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of A Review of the Earnings Management Literature and its Implications for Standard Setting. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the A Review of the Earnings Management Literature and its Implications for Standard Setting.

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.

This paper is also available at doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.156445.

Explore hit-papers with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026