Methodological themes: Critical appraisal of the cloze procedure's use in the accounting domain
The cloze procedure has been seen by accounting researchers as a useful tool for investigating the communicative effectiveness of accounting narratives. Compared with text-based readability measures, such as the Flesch test, the cloze procedure has often been viewed as an alternative and superior me...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Jones, Michael John [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
1997 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Umfang: |
24 |
|---|
| Reproduktion: |
Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
In: Accounting, auditing & accountability journal - Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1988, 10(1997), 1, Seite 105-128 |
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:10 ; year:1997 ; number:1 ; pages:105-128 ; extent:24 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1108/09513579710158739 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
NLEJ219858985 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLEJ219858985 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20210707094214.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 090811s1997 xxk|||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1108/09513579710158739 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLEJ219858985 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 044 | |c XA-GB | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Jones, Michael John |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Methodological themes: Critical appraisal of the cloze procedure's use in the accounting domain |
| 264 | 1 | |c 1997 | |
| 300 | |a 24 | ||
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a The cloze procedure has been seen by accounting researchers as a useful tool for investigating the communicative effectiveness of accounting narratives. Compared with text-based readability measures, such as the Flesch test, the cloze procedure has often been viewed as an alternative and superior method of measuring understandability. Provides a critical review of the accounting and educational cloze-based literature. In particular, questions the validity of the cloze procedure, the cloze procedure's measurement of understandability, and the correctness of the criterion reference scores traditionally used to interpret cloze scores. Concludes that these legitimate concerns about the cloze procedure must be taken into account when the results of cloze-based accounting research studies are evaluated. Repeats calls for further research to establish the validity of the cloze procedure in the accounting domain and to support the results of existing studies. | ||
| 533 | |f Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005 | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Accounting research | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Communications | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Procedures | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t Accounting, auditing & accountability journal |d Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1988 |g 10(1997), 1, Seite 105-128 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)NLEJ219578850 |w (DE-600)2018956-4 |x 0951-3574 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:10 |g year:1997 |g number:1 |g pages:105-128 |g extent:24 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09513579710158739 |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a ZDB-1-EFD | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NL_ARTICLE | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 10 |j 1997 |e 1 |h 105-128 |g 24 | ||
| author_variant |
m j j mj mjj |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:09513574:1997----::ehdlgclhmsrtclpriaotelzpoeueue |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
1997 |
| publishDate |
1997 |
| allfields |
10.1108/09513579710158739 doi (DE-627)NLEJ219858985 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng XA-GB Jones, Michael John verfasserin aut Methodological themes: Critical appraisal of the cloze procedure's use in the accounting domain 1997 24 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The cloze procedure has been seen by accounting researchers as a useful tool for investigating the communicative effectiveness of accounting narratives. Compared with text-based readability measures, such as the Flesch test, the cloze procedure has often been viewed as an alternative and superior method of measuring understandability. Provides a critical review of the accounting and educational cloze-based literature. In particular, questions the validity of the cloze procedure, the cloze procedure's measurement of understandability, and the correctness of the criterion reference scores traditionally used to interpret cloze scores. Concludes that these legitimate concerns about the cloze procedure must be taken into account when the results of cloze-based accounting research studies are evaluated. Repeats calls for further research to establish the validity of the cloze procedure in the accounting domain and to support the results of existing studies. Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005 Accounting research Communications Procedures In Accounting, auditing & accountability journal Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1988 10(1997), 1, Seite 105-128 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ219578850 (DE-600)2018956-4 0951-3574 nnns volume:10 year:1997 number:1 pages:105-128 extent:24 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09513579710158739 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-EFD GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 10 1997 1 105-128 24 |
| spelling |
10.1108/09513579710158739 doi (DE-627)NLEJ219858985 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng XA-GB Jones, Michael John verfasserin aut Methodological themes: Critical appraisal of the cloze procedure's use in the accounting domain 1997 24 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The cloze procedure has been seen by accounting researchers as a useful tool for investigating the communicative effectiveness of accounting narratives. Compared with text-based readability measures, such as the Flesch test, the cloze procedure has often been viewed as an alternative and superior method of measuring understandability. Provides a critical review of the accounting and educational cloze-based literature. In particular, questions the validity of the cloze procedure, the cloze procedure's measurement of understandability, and the correctness of the criterion reference scores traditionally used to interpret cloze scores. Concludes that these legitimate concerns about the cloze procedure must be taken into account when the results of cloze-based accounting research studies are evaluated. Repeats calls for further research to establish the validity of the cloze procedure in the accounting domain and to support the results of existing studies. Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005 Accounting research Communications Procedures In Accounting, auditing & accountability journal Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1988 10(1997), 1, Seite 105-128 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ219578850 (DE-600)2018956-4 0951-3574 nnns volume:10 year:1997 number:1 pages:105-128 extent:24 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09513579710158739 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-EFD GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 10 1997 1 105-128 24 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1108/09513579710158739 doi (DE-627)NLEJ219858985 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng XA-GB Jones, Michael John verfasserin aut Methodological themes: Critical appraisal of the cloze procedure's use in the accounting domain 1997 24 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The cloze procedure has been seen by accounting researchers as a useful tool for investigating the communicative effectiveness of accounting narratives. Compared with text-based readability measures, such as the Flesch test, the cloze procedure has often been viewed as an alternative and superior method of measuring understandability. Provides a critical review of the accounting and educational cloze-based literature. In particular, questions the validity of the cloze procedure, the cloze procedure's measurement of understandability, and the correctness of the criterion reference scores traditionally used to interpret cloze scores. Concludes that these legitimate concerns about the cloze procedure must be taken into account when the results of cloze-based accounting research studies are evaluated. Repeats calls for further research to establish the validity of the cloze procedure in the accounting domain and to support the results of existing studies. Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005 Accounting research Communications Procedures In Accounting, auditing & accountability journal Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1988 10(1997), 1, Seite 105-128 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ219578850 (DE-600)2018956-4 0951-3574 nnns volume:10 year:1997 number:1 pages:105-128 extent:24 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09513579710158739 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-EFD GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 10 1997 1 105-128 24 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1108/09513579710158739 doi (DE-627)NLEJ219858985 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng XA-GB Jones, Michael John verfasserin aut Methodological themes: Critical appraisal of the cloze procedure's use in the accounting domain 1997 24 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The cloze procedure has been seen by accounting researchers as a useful tool for investigating the communicative effectiveness of accounting narratives. Compared with text-based readability measures, such as the Flesch test, the cloze procedure has often been viewed as an alternative and superior method of measuring understandability. Provides a critical review of the accounting and educational cloze-based literature. In particular, questions the validity of the cloze procedure, the cloze procedure's measurement of understandability, and the correctness of the criterion reference scores traditionally used to interpret cloze scores. Concludes that these legitimate concerns about the cloze procedure must be taken into account when the results of cloze-based accounting research studies are evaluated. Repeats calls for further research to establish the validity of the cloze procedure in the accounting domain and to support the results of existing studies. Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005 Accounting research Communications Procedures In Accounting, auditing & accountability journal Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1988 10(1997), 1, Seite 105-128 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ219578850 (DE-600)2018956-4 0951-3574 nnns volume:10 year:1997 number:1 pages:105-128 extent:24 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09513579710158739 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-EFD GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 10 1997 1 105-128 24 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1108/09513579710158739 doi (DE-627)NLEJ219858985 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng XA-GB Jones, Michael John verfasserin aut Methodological themes: Critical appraisal of the cloze procedure's use in the accounting domain 1997 24 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier The cloze procedure has been seen by accounting researchers as a useful tool for investigating the communicative effectiveness of accounting narratives. Compared with text-based readability measures, such as the Flesch test, the cloze procedure has often been viewed as an alternative and superior method of measuring understandability. Provides a critical review of the accounting and educational cloze-based literature. In particular, questions the validity of the cloze procedure, the cloze procedure's measurement of understandability, and the correctness of the criterion reference scores traditionally used to interpret cloze scores. Concludes that these legitimate concerns about the cloze procedure must be taken into account when the results of cloze-based accounting research studies are evaluated. Repeats calls for further research to establish the validity of the cloze procedure in the accounting domain and to support the results of existing studies. Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005 Accounting research Communications Procedures In Accounting, auditing & accountability journal Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1988 10(1997), 1, Seite 105-128 Online-Ressource (DE-627)NLEJ219578850 (DE-600)2018956-4 0951-3574 nnns volume:10 year:1997 number:1 pages:105-128 extent:24 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09513579710158739 GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-EFD GBV_NL_ARTICLE AR 10 1997 1 105-128 24 |
| language |
English |
| source |
In Accounting, auditing & accountability journal 10(1997), 1, Seite 105-128 volume:10 year:1997 number:1 pages:105-128 extent:24 |
| sourceStr |
In Accounting, auditing & accountability journal 10(1997), 1, Seite 105-128 volume:10 year:1997 number:1 pages:105-128 extent:24 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Accounting research Communications Procedures |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Accounting, auditing & accountability journal |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Jones, Michael John @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
1997-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
NLEJ219578850 |
| id |
NLEJ219858985 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">NLEJ219858985</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20210707094214.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">090811s1997 xxk|||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1108/09513579710158739</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)NLEJ219858985</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="044" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="c">XA-GB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jones, Michael John</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Methodological themes: Critical appraisal of the cloze procedure's use in the accounting domain</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">1997</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The cloze procedure has been seen by accounting researchers as a useful tool for investigating the communicative effectiveness of accounting narratives. Compared with text-based readability measures, such as the Flesch test, the cloze procedure has often been viewed as an alternative and superior method of measuring understandability. Provides a critical review of the accounting and educational cloze-based literature. In particular, questions the validity of the cloze procedure, the cloze procedure's measurement of understandability, and the correctness of the criterion reference scores traditionally used to interpret cloze scores. Concludes that these legitimate concerns about the cloze procedure must be taken into account when the results of cloze-based accounting research studies are evaluated. Repeats calls for further research to establish the validity of the cloze procedure in the accounting domain and to support the results of existing studies.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="533" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="f">Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Accounting research</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Communications</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Procedures</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Accounting, auditing & accountability journal</subfield><subfield code="d">Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1988</subfield><subfield code="g">10(1997), 1, Seite 105-128</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)NLEJ219578850</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2018956-4</subfield><subfield code="x">0951-3574</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:10</subfield><subfield code="g">year:1997</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:105-128</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09513579710158739</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-1-EFD</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_NL_ARTICLE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">10</subfield><subfield code="j">1997</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">105-128</subfield><subfield code="g">24</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| series2 |
Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005 |
| author |
Jones, Michael John |
| spellingShingle |
Jones, Michael John misc Accounting research misc Communications misc Procedures Methodological themes: Critical appraisal of the cloze procedure's use in the accounting domain |
| authorStr |
Jones, Michael John |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)NLEJ219578850 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut |
| collection |
NL |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
0951-3574 |
| topic_title |
Methodological themes: Critical appraisal of the cloze procedure's use in the accounting domain Accounting research Communications Procedures |
| topic |
misc Accounting research misc Communications misc Procedures |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc Accounting research misc Communications misc Procedures |
| topic_browse |
misc Accounting research misc Communications misc Procedures |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Accounting, auditing & accountability journal |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
NLEJ219578850 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Accounting, auditing & accountability journal |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)NLEJ219578850 (DE-600)2018956-4 |
| title |
Methodological themes: Critical appraisal of the cloze procedure's use in the accounting domain |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)NLEJ219858985 |
| title_full |
Methodological themes: Critical appraisal of the cloze procedure's use in the accounting domain |
| author_sort |
Jones, Michael John |
| journal |
Accounting, auditing & accountability journal |
| journalStr |
Accounting, auditing & accountability journal |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
1997 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
105 |
| author_browse |
Jones, Michael John |
| container_volume |
10 |
| physical |
24 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| countryofpublication_str_mv |
XA-GB |
| author-letter |
Jones, Michael John |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1108/09513579710158739 |
| title_sort |
methodological themes: critical appraisal of the cloze procedure's use in the accounting domain |
| title_auth |
Methodological themes: Critical appraisal of the cloze procedure's use in the accounting domain |
| abstract |
The cloze procedure has been seen by accounting researchers as a useful tool for investigating the communicative effectiveness of accounting narratives. Compared with text-based readability measures, such as the Flesch test, the cloze procedure has often been viewed as an alternative and superior method of measuring understandability. Provides a critical review of the accounting and educational cloze-based literature. In particular, questions the validity of the cloze procedure, the cloze procedure's measurement of understandability, and the correctness of the criterion reference scores traditionally used to interpret cloze scores. Concludes that these legitimate concerns about the cloze procedure must be taken into account when the results of cloze-based accounting research studies are evaluated. Repeats calls for further research to establish the validity of the cloze procedure in the accounting domain and to support the results of existing studies. |
| abstractGer |
The cloze procedure has been seen by accounting researchers as a useful tool for investigating the communicative effectiveness of accounting narratives. Compared with text-based readability measures, such as the Flesch test, the cloze procedure has often been viewed as an alternative and superior method of measuring understandability. Provides a critical review of the accounting and educational cloze-based literature. In particular, questions the validity of the cloze procedure, the cloze procedure's measurement of understandability, and the correctness of the criterion reference scores traditionally used to interpret cloze scores. Concludes that these legitimate concerns about the cloze procedure must be taken into account when the results of cloze-based accounting research studies are evaluated. Repeats calls for further research to establish the validity of the cloze procedure in the accounting domain and to support the results of existing studies. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
The cloze procedure has been seen by accounting researchers as a useful tool for investigating the communicative effectiveness of accounting narratives. Compared with text-based readability measures, such as the Flesch test, the cloze procedure has often been viewed as an alternative and superior method of measuring understandability. Provides a critical review of the accounting and educational cloze-based literature. In particular, questions the validity of the cloze procedure, the cloze procedure's measurement of understandability, and the correctness of the criterion reference scores traditionally used to interpret cloze scores. Concludes that these legitimate concerns about the cloze procedure must be taken into account when the results of cloze-based accounting research studies are evaluated. Repeats calls for further research to establish the validity of the cloze procedure in the accounting domain and to support the results of existing studies. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U ZDB-1-EFD GBV_NL_ARTICLE |
| container_issue |
1 |
| title_short |
Methodological themes: Critical appraisal of the cloze procedure's use in the accounting domain |
| url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09513579710158739 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| ppnlink |
NLEJ219578850 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1108/09513579710158739 |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T06:18:36.397Z |
| _version_ |
1803809420895846400 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">NLEJ219858985</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20210707094214.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">090811s1997 xxk|||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1108/09513579710158739</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)NLEJ219858985</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="044" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="c">XA-GB</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jones, Michael John</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Methodological themes: Critical appraisal of the cloze procedure's use in the accounting domain</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">1997</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The cloze procedure has been seen by accounting researchers as a useful tool for investigating the communicative effectiveness of accounting narratives. Compared with text-based readability measures, such as the Flesch test, the cloze procedure has often been viewed as an alternative and superior method of measuring understandability. Provides a critical review of the accounting and educational cloze-based literature. In particular, questions the validity of the cloze procedure, the cloze procedure's measurement of understandability, and the correctness of the criterion reference scores traditionally used to interpret cloze scores. Concludes that these legitimate concerns about the cloze procedure must be taken into account when the results of cloze-based accounting research studies are evaluated. Repeats calls for further research to establish the validity of the cloze procedure in the accounting domain and to support the results of existing studies.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="533" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="f">Emerald Fulltext Archive Database 1994-2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Accounting research</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Communications</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Procedures</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Accounting, auditing & accountability journal</subfield><subfield code="d">Bradford : MCB Univ. Press, 1988</subfield><subfield code="g">10(1997), 1, Seite 105-128</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)NLEJ219578850</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2018956-4</subfield><subfield code="x">0951-3574</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:10</subfield><subfield code="g">year:1997</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:105-128</subfield><subfield code="g">extent:24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09513579710158739</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ZDB-1-EFD</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_NL_ARTICLE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">10</subfield><subfield code="j">1997</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">105-128</subfield><subfield code="g">24</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.4007626 |