Deception in Management Accounting Experimental Research : “A Tricky Issue” Revisited

Management accounting scholars generally accept the proposition that our subject matter requires a multi-disciplinary approach to study. The question of what are appropriate norms for conducting research in that environment is not as clear as it may be in more homogenous research communities. One research methods issue that has become more controversial in recent years in our literature is the appropriateness of the experimenter deceiving experimental participants. Broadly speaking there are two main positions about experimental deception: from a psychology perspective “deception if necessary” and from an experimental economics perspective “deception should be banned.” Our goal is to deepen and develop a common understanding within the management accounting research community about what constitutes deceptive research practices. We review the viewpoints and arguments supporting the views of the two base disciplines and the transfer of their norms to management accounting research. We develop a framework for analyzing the need for and potential consequences of using deception in management accounting research. Our analysis implies the need for careful case-by-case consideration, ex ante by researchers and ex post by journal editors, of experiments employing deception in light of the considerations raised in this article. In the longer run, our analysis suggests that the management accounting research community may need to consider if a more explicit policy statement on the role of deception in management accounting research is warranted or whether a case-by-case approach as advocated by us as an interim measure is sufficient