Essay on Technological Studies on Accounting Standards
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.1982-6486.rco.2025.246741Downloads
References
Adil, M., Nagu, N., Rustam, A., Wahyuni, I., & Winarsih, E. (2022). Interpretive paradigm on development of science and accounting research. International Journal of Humanities Education and Social Sciences (IJHESS), 1(4), 297–302.
Albu, C. N., & Toader, S. (2012). Bridging the gap between accounting academic research and practice: Some conjectures from Romania. Accounting and Management Information Systems, 11(2), 163–173.
Azevedo, H. L., & Wielewski, G. D. (2016). Da objetividade à intersubjetividade: Contribuições da teoria do agir comunicativo para o paradigma interpretativo. Educação: Revista do Centro de Educação, 41(2), 471–481.
Baker, C. R., & Bettner, M. S. (1997). Interpretive and critical research in accounting: A commentary on its absence from mainstream accounting research. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 8(4), 293–310. https://doi.org/10.1006/cpac.1996.0116
Barker, R., & Penman, S. (2020). Moving the conceptual framework forward: Accounting for uncertainty. Contemporary Accounting Research, 37(1), 322–357. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12585
Barker, R., Lennard, A., Penman, S., & Teixeira, A. (2022). Accounting for intangible assets: Suggested solutions. Accounting and Business Research, 52(6), 601–630. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2021.1938963
Barth, M. E. (2015). Financial accounting research, practice, and financial accountability. Abacus, 51(4), 499–510. https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12057
Bilhim, J. A. F., & Gonçalves, A. O. (2022). Abordagens epistemológicas e pluralismo na pesquisa em contabilidade: Para além do paradigma dominante. Public Sciences & Policies, 7(1), 59–75. https://doi.org/10.33167/2184-0644.CPP2021.VVII.N1/pp.59-75
Brasil. (2023). Emenda Constitucional nº 132, de 20 de dezembro de 2023: Altera o sistema tributário nacional.
Brasil. (2025). Lei Complementar nº 214, de 16 de janeiro de 2025: Institui o Imposto sobre Bens e Serviços (IBS), a Contribuição Social sobre Bens e Serviços (CBS) e o Imposto Seletivo (IS); cria o Comitê Gestor do IBS e altera a legislação tributária.
Breitbarth, T., & Herold, D. M. (2018). Closing the academia-practice gap in corporate sustainability management research: Challenges and bridges. Journal of Environmental Sustainability, 6(1), Article 4.
Broedel, A., & Flores, E. S. (2021). Pesquisa contábil: O falso dilema entre a consistência metodológica e a relevância prática. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 25(6), e210119.
Burton, F. G., Summers, S. L., Wilks, T. J., & Wood, D. A. (2022). Relevance of accounting research (ROAR) scores: Ratings of titles and abstracts by accounting professionals. Accounting Horizons, 36(2), 7–18.
Chua, W. F. (1986). Radical developments in accounting thought. The Accounting Review, 61(4), 601–632.
Clor-Proell, S., Even-Tov, O., Lee, C. M., & Rajgopal, S. (2025). Bridging the gap between academia and practice in accounting. Accounting Horizons, 39(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.2308/HORIZONS-2024-071
Comitê de Pronunciamentos Contábeis. (2009). Pronunciamento técnico CPC 23: Políticas contábeis, mudança de estimativa e retificação de erro. Recuperado em 13 de março de 2026, de https://www.cpc.org.br/CPC/Documentos-Emitidos/Pronunciamentos/Pronunciamento?Id=54
Comitê de Pronunciamentos Contábeis. (2009). Pronunciamento técnico CPC 25: Provisões, passivos contingentes e ativos contingentes. Recuperado em 13 de março de 2026, de https://www.cpc.org.br/CPC/Documentos-Emitidos/Pronunciamentos/Pronunciamento?Id=56
Comitê de Pronunciamentos Contábeis. (2009). Pronunciamento técnico CPC 31: Ativo não circulante mantido para venda e operação descontinuada. Recuperado em 13 de março de 2026, de https://www.cpc.org.br/CPC/Documentos-Emitidos/Pronunciamentos/Pronunciamento?Id=62
Comitê de Pronunciamentos Contábeis. (2010). Pronunciamento técnico CPC 01: Redução ao valor recuperável. Recuperado em 13 de março de 2026, de https://www.cpc.org.br/CPC/Documentos-Emitidos/Pronunciamentos/Pronunciamento?Id=2
Comitê de Pronunciamentos Contábeis. (2016). Pronunciamento técnico CPC 47: Receita de contrato com cliente. Recuperado em 13 de março de 2026, de https://www.cpc.org.br/CPC/Documentos-Emitidos/Pronunciamentos/Pronunciamento?Id=105
Comitê de Pronunciamentos Contábeis. (2018). Interpretação técnica ICPC 22: Incerteza sobre tratamento de tributos sobre o lucro. Recuperado em 13 de março de 2026, de https://www.cpc.org.br/CPC/Documentos-Emitidos/Interpretacoes/Interpretacao?Id=114
Comitê de Pronunciamentos Contábeis. (2019). Pronunciamento técnico CPC 00 (R2): Estrutura conceitual para relatório financeiro. Recuperado em 13 de março de 2026, de https://www.cpc.org.br/CPC/Documentos-Emitidos/Pronunciamentos/Pronunciamento?Id=80
Comitê de Pronunciamentos Contábeis. (2026). Pronunciamento técnico CPC 51: Apresentação e divulgação nas demonstrações contábeis. Recuperado em 13 de março de 2026, de https://www.cpc.org.br/CPC/Documentos-Emitidos/Pronunciamentos/Pronunciamento?Id=162
Cornacchione, E. (2025). Artigos tecnológicos: Pesquisa, produção na área de contabilidade e negócios (Editorial). Revista de Contabilidade da UFBA, 19(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.9771/rcufba.v19i2.67143
Fontes, P. V. (2020). A reflexão epistemológica de Habermas e a sua proposta de racionalidade comunicativa. Griot: Revista de Filosofia, 20(1), 277–288.
Fraser, I., & Sheehy, B. (2020). Abundant publications but minuscule impact: The irrelevance of academic accounting research on practice and the profession. Publications, 8, 46. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications8040046
Guerreiro, R. (2022). Algumas reflexões sobre a relevância da pesquisa contábil para a sociedade (Editorial). Revista Contabilidade e Finanças – USP, 33(90), e9040. https://doi.org/10.1590/1808-057x20229040.pt
Habermas, J. (2011). A lógica das ciências sociais (3ª ed., M. A. Casanova, Trad.). Vozes.
Hendriksen, E. S., & Van Breda, M. F. (1999). Teoria da contabilidade (Z. Sanvicente, Trad.). Atlas.
Inanga, E. L., & Schneider, W. B. (2005). The failure of accounting research to improve accounting practice: A problem of theory and lack of communication. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 16(3), 227–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1045-2354(03)00073-X
International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). (2011). Basis for conclusions – IFRS 15.
International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). (2023). Staff paper: Agenda reference 9B—Project rate-regulated activities: The recognition threshold. Recuperado em 13 de março de 2026, de https://www.ifrs.org/content/dam/ifrs/meetings/2023/february/iasb/ap9b-the-recognition-threshold.pdf
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.
Jiang, X., Kanodia, C., & Zhang, G. (2019, May). Principles of asset recognition when future benefits are uncertain. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2797488
Martins, E. (2005). Normativismo e/ou positivismo em contabilidade: Qual o futuro? (Editorial). Revista Contabilidade & Finanças, 16(39), 3. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-70772005000300001
Martins, E. (2025). Reflexões sobre a pesquisa contábil brasileira atual (Editorial). Revista de Educação e Pesquisa em Contabilidade, 19, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.17524/repec.v19.e3793
Motta, G. da S. (2022). What is a technological article? Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 26(Suppl. 1), e220208. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2022220208.en
Nunes, V. B. (2020). Habermas: Da racionalidade instrumental à comunicativa. In Emancipação pela educação: Encontros entre Piaget e Habermas (pp. 21–64). Oficina Universitária; Cultura Acadêmica. https://doi.org/10.36311/2020.978-65-5954-010-5
Parker, L. D., Guthrie, J., & Linacre, S. (2011). The relationship between academic accounting research and professional practice. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 24(1), 5–14.
Popper, K. R. (1978). A lógica das ciências sociais (E. R. Martins et al., Trads.). Tempo Brasileiro; Universidade de Brasília.
Popper, K. R. (2013). A lógica da pesquisa científica (2ª ed., L. Hegenberg & O. S. da Mota, Trads.). Cultrix.
Rodrigues, J. M., Bonfim, M. P., & Braga, S. V. (2025). Predomínio do positivismo na contabilidade: Reflexões sobre a pesquisa no Brasil. Revista Mineira de Contabilidade, (3), 56–67. https://doi.org/10.51320/rmc.v26i3.17272025
Sauerbronn, F. F., Homero Junior, P. F., Araújo, M. C., Carvalho, T. F. M., & Lima, J. P. R. (2023). Pesquisa crítica em contabilidade: Um campo de possibilidades. Revista Mineira de Contabilidade, 24(2), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.21714/2446-9114RMC2023v24n3a01
Watts, R. L., & Zimmerman, J. L. (1986). Positive accounting theory. Prentice-Hall.
Zhang, Y., De Zoysa, A., & Cortese, C. (2019). Uncertainty expressions in accounting: Critical issues and recommendations. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 13(4), 4–22. https://doi.org/10.14453/aabfj.v13i4.2
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mateus Alexandre Costa dos Santos
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The RCO adopts the Free Open Access policy, under the standard Creative Commons agreement (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). The agreement provides that:
- Submission of text authorizes its publication and implies commitment that the same material is not being submitted to another journal. The original is considered definitive.
- Authors retain the copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which allows the sharing of the work with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are authorized to take additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g. publish in an institutional repository or as a book chapter), with necessary recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on their personal page) before or during the editorial process, as this can generate productive changes as well as increase the impact and citation of published work (See The Effect of Free Access).
- The journal does not pay copyright to the authors of the published texts.
- The journal's copyright holder, except those already agreed in the Free Open Access Agreement (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), is the Accounting Department of the Faculty of Economics, Administration and Accounting of Ribeirão Preto of the University of São Paulo.
No submission or publication fees are charged.
Up to 4 authors per article are accepted. Exceptionally duly justified cases may be reviewed by the Executive Committee of the RCO. Exceptional cases are considered as: multi-institutional projects; manuscripts resulting from the collaboration of research groups; or involving large teams for evidence collection, construction of primary data, and comparative experiments.
It is recommended that the authorship be ordered by contribution of each of the individuals listed as authors, especially in the design and planning of the research project, in obtaining or analyzing and interpreting data, and writing. Authors must declare the actual contributions of each author, filling the letter to the editor, at the beginning of the submission, taking responsibility for the information given.
Authors are allowed to change throughout the evaluation process and prior to the publication of the manuscript. The Authors should indicate the composition and final order of authorship in the document signed by all those involved when accepted for publication. If the composition and authoring order is different than previously reported in the system, all previously listed authors should be in agreement.
In the case of identification of authorship without merit or contribution (ghost, guest or gift authorship), the RCO follows the procedure recommended by COPE.
