Thecurrent review is of Hassall et al. article “Communicationapprehension and communication self-efficacy in accounting students”published in Asian Review of Accounting. This review will begin witha synopsis of the article followed by a critique of the variouscomponents of the article including objectivity, accuracy, currency,relevance, authority and stability. In addition, the weaknesses andstrengths of the article will be identified to access the suitabilityof the article as a peer reviewed journal. Overall, this article iswell written, and relevant to accounting practice.
Thearticle was meant to establish a connection between communicationapprehension (CA) and communication self efficacy among accountingstudents. The study utilized two questionnaires which weredistributed to students of accounting in order to achieve thisobjective. These questionnaires included the Personal Report ofCommunication Apprehension (PRCA-24) created by McCroskey to accessoral communication apprehension (OCA) and Daly Miller’s writtencommunication apprehension (WCA) alongside a questionnaire to accesscommunication self-efficacy (Hassall, Arquero, Joyce, & Gonzalez,2013). The study established a strong link between these differentconcepts of communication apprehension and self efficacy andindividual concepts of self efficacy (Hassall et al., 2013). Thearticle’s findings are important as it provides a possible progressin terms of understanding the obstacle to the development ofcommunication skills as well as highlight probable action to reduceand eliminate this barrier. The author highlights the importance ofdeveloping communication skills among accountants in order to meetfuture challenges. The article concludes by proposing for futurestudies’ need to incorporate into pedagogy of accounting educationthe aspects that enhance communication skills which increaseself-efficacy.
Allthe four authors of the article are highly qualified professionals inthe accounting field. For example, Trevor Hassall is a professor ofaccounting education at Sheffield Hallam University, Jose Arqueroteaches at the University of Sevilla after being awarded theexemplary doctoral award with a thesis on accounting education, JohnJoyce is also a Professor of Management Accounting Education atSheffield Hallam University and finally, Jose Gonzalez is a DoctorContracted in Accounting is Spain’s University of Seville.Impressively, all the authors have great interest in matters ofcommunication in accounting (Hassall et al., 2013). They have alsopublished various articles in credible journals of accounting acrossthe world. Some of the journals written by authors also appear on thereference list of the current article. Emerald insight where thearticle was retrieved is a credible research database (Coetsee,2011).
Theinformation in the article is from a current study. The informationis backed up with in text citations and a rich list of sources at theend of the article (Polit& Beck, 2013).The four authors are well informed on the subject hence theinformation in the current article is accurate and reliable.
Thearticle was recently published in 2013, which means the researchers’study is current. The sources used in the article vary from recentsources to sources that are as old as 40 years.
Thecurrent article is obtained from Asian Accounting Review, which is acredible journal. It is meant for educating scholars andprofessionals in the field of accounting on the various aspects ofcommunication apprehension and self efficacy. The information isorganized in a logical manner and is relevant to the academiccommunity (Ballenger,2009).
Thearticle is from a professional journal and is available in a renownedonline database. It can be accessed in print in electronically. Thearticle is thus stable as a resource.
Strengthsof the Article
Thearticle utilizes a wide range of sources published over a long periodof time to support the current study. The number of sources consultedis many, meaning that the researchers committed adequate effort inwriting this article.
Thearticle has a great structure, with the abstract summarizing all theaspects of the article. The various subheadings in the article makeit easy for the reader to understand the article (Ballenger,2009).
Thearticle was accessed from Emeraldinsight and it’s clearly and wellset out. It is in form of a pdf document, which is easy to read. Thearticle begins with an abstract that clearly outlines all the majorcomponents of the article including the article’s purpose,methodology and study design, the findings, practical implications toaccounting practice, originality and value of the study. The articleis subdivided into various headings which address differentcomponents regarding the topic of interest.
Thearticle’s conclusion is extensive and discusses various aspectsregarding the current study. The rationale and the implications ofthis study have been broadly outlined (Ballenger,2009).The authors have also highlighted the limitations in the currentstudy, besides guiding future researchers on the possible way toexplore the area in details. Ways of improving this study have beenproposed by the researchers.
Suggestionfor Future Studies
Theresearchers have clearly stated that, the current study is apreliminary research and future research is welcomed in the samearea. The researches propose various ways in which their study couldhave been improved, which gives scholars conducting similar studiesin the future, a way forward. For instance, the researchers arguethat, their current study could have been improved by incorporatingboth accounting professionals and other professionals, sayengineering students experiencing similar problems. The researcherstherefore acknowledge that their current study had some limitations.Since the study was carried out in Asia, the researchers pointed outsome unique aspects of communication apprehension among Asians andother groups. Some were found to be common among all the groups,while some were inherent to Asians. As such, other studies could bereplicated in other groups of people like Africa, Americans or evenHispanics.
Thediscussion section of this article is well developed. The informationor knowledge developed through the current study has been supportedthroughout the discussion process (Day& Gastel, 2012).In fact, this section provides the reader with what the study was allabout, and helps in understanding the results, even though they arestatistically presented.
Thearticle uses quantitative study design. Data was collected using twoquestionnaires. This use of two types of questionnaires complicatesthe article (Hassall et al., 2013). In addition, the data ispresented in tables and summarized in statistical manner which makeit difficult for individuals with no prior knowledge of statisticsunable to understand the findings (Thomas,2003 Suen & Ary, 2014).
Themethodology has not been described in details as in the sample size,and the criteria for choosing the respondents.
Thequestionnaires adopted from previous models were not described wellto the reader (Thomas,2003).The reader may not understand how and why these models were chosen.
Theliterature review has not been indicated in the article, even thoughthe authors link it into the introduction and continues throughsubsequent subheadings. The methodology section has not beenindicated in the subheadings and is presented as “establishing thelink” which makes it difficult for the reader to establish thissection without reading through.
Whereasthe use of several sources, some sources used by the authors are morethan 40 years which makes the article not up to date. The researcherscould have made use of current sources in order to improve thearticle’s currency and applicability.
Thecurrent article is well organized, clearly written and wellpresented. The use of quantitative research approach in this studywas appropriate although it could have integrated qualitative aspectsto allow a more descriptive nature of the topic. The sourcesconsulted are varied and within a long time frame, which indicate theauthors’ interest and exploration of the topic. The article ishighly credible as the authors are professionals and wellknowledgeable in the subject of accounting in particular accounting.Generally, the article by Hassall et al. is a great piece andrelevant to the accounting practice.
Ballenger,B. (2009), Thecurious researcher: A guide to writing research papers.Longman.
Coetsee,D. (2011), A comment on research frameworks applied in accountingresearch. SAJournal of Accounting Research,25(1),81-102.
Day,R., & Gastel, B. (2012), Howto write and publish a scientific paper.Cambridge University Press.
Hassall,T., Arquero, L.J. Joyce, J. & Gonzalez, M.J. (2013),Communication apprehension and communication self-efficacy inaccounting students. AsianReview of Accounting,Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 160-175.
O`Leary,Z. (2013), Theessential guide to doing your research project.Sage.
Polit,D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2013), Essentialsof nursing research.Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Suen,H. K., & Ary, D. (2014), Analyzingquantitative behavioral observation data.Psychology Press.
Thomas,R. M. (2003), Blendingqualitative and quantitative research methods in theses anddissertations.Corwin Press.
3 | Page