An examination of the literature review effort of an academic article: on costing methods relevance

An examination of the literature review effort of an academic article: on costing methods relevance (information from chatpdf.com) [a note for accounting and finance students]

The article reviewed: "How to Analyze the Practical Relevance of Costing Methods? The Example of Hospital Cost Accounting in France" Abacus

My question 1a: "What are the research objectives and research issues studied in this article?"

The reply: "The research objectives and issues addressed in the article are centered around analyzing the practical relevance of costing methods used in healthcare, particularly hospital cost accounting in France. Specifically, the objectives include:

1. Building an Analysis of Practical Relevance: The article aims to construct an analysis based on the techniques employed in healthcare costing methods, focusing on how their foundational technical characteristics contribute to practical relevance .

2. Reopening the "Black Box" of Accounting Techniques: It seeks to explore and better understand the underlying accounting techniques used within costing methods, which is essential for analyzing and enhancing their practical relevance .

3. Evaluating Costing Methods and User Perspectives: By conducting interventionist research at a cancer center, the study investigates how users of the costing methods perceive their practical relevance, aiming to gather insights that can inform improvements to these methods .

The overarching research question is: How can the practical relevance of costing methods be analyzed based on their underlying technical characteristics, with a view to improving them? This question guides the investigation into the impact of calculation techniques on the practical applicability of costing methods in a healthcare setting ."

My question 1b: "Yes, the literature review effort in the article appears to be strongly objective-driven. This is evident through several key aspects:

1. Clear Research Objectives: The literature review is structured to align with clear research objectives, specifically focusing on analyzing the practical relevance of costing methods in the healthcare sector. It identifies gaps in existing literature, particularly regarding the criteria for determining the practical relevance of these methods, which directly informs the research question being addressed  .

2. Connection to Research Questions: The author ties the literature review closely to the central research question regarding how the technical characteristics of costing methods can be analyzed to improve their practical relevance. This connection underscores a goal-oriented approach that prioritizes addressing specific theoretical and practical issues within the field of management accounting  .

3. Identification of Gaps: The literature review underscores limitations in previous studies and identifies areas where further exploration is needed, particularly concerning the comprehensiveness of current costing methods. By highlighting these gaps, the author justifies the need for their own research, demonstrating how the literature review is driven by the objective of contributing to the area of study  .

4. Integration of Relevant Theories: The review integrates existing theories and frameworks related to costing methods and practical relevance. This integration serves the research objectives by grounding the study in established academic discourse and illustrating how the proposed research will build upon and refine this knowledge base  .

5. Empirical and Theoretical Relevance: The focus on examining practical relevance through empirical evidence and theoretical frameworks illustrates an objective-driven approach. The literature review supports the premise that the research not only seeks to contribute to theoretical knowledge but also aims to address practical challenges in the implementation of costing methods in healthcare settings  .

Overall, the literature review is indeed objective-driven, as it meticulously outlines existing knowledge, identifies deficiencies, and aligns these elements with the research goals of improving the analysis of costing methods' practical relevance. The focus remains on achieving specific outcomes related to the efficacy and application of these methods rather than diverging into unrelated areas."

My question 2: "What academic topics have been examined in the literature review efforts of the author?"

The reply: "In the literature review section, the author examines several academic topics related to costing methods and their practical relevance in management accounting. The key topics discussed include:

1. Relevance in Management Accounting: The literature highlights the ambiguity in defining and measuring relevance within management accounting, emphasizing the need for clearer frameworks and metrics .

2. Historical Critique of Management Accounting Techniques: The work references early critiques of management accounting techniques, particularly by Johnson and Kaplan, which highlighted their inadequacy and irrelevance in practice .

3. Interventionist Research in Management Accounting: The author discusses the application of interventionist research as a method to interweave practical experiences with theoretical developments, particularly in the context of healthcare costing methods .

4. Healthcare Costing Methods: The literature review addresses the evolution and precision of healthcare costing techniques, including discussions on Activity-Based Costing (ABC), Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing (TDABC), and other innovative costing approaches .

5. Impact of Calculation Techniques: The author considers how the technical aspects of costing methods impact their practical relevance, noting factors such as cost traceability and causality, which have been extensively analyzed in previous studies .

6. Forms of Practical Relevance: The review identifies three main forms of practical relevance (legitimative, conceptual, and instrumental relevance) and explores how these can be contextualized to improve costing methods  .

Overall, the literature review interconnects the theoretical constructs of costing methods with practical applications in healthcare, setting the foundation for further empirical research."

My question 3: "What literature synthesis effort has been made by the author in this article?"

The reply: "The author makes a significant literature synthesis effort by integrating various academic discussions around costing methods and their practical relevance into a cohesive framework. This synthesis can be outlined as follows:

1. Identification of Key Criteria: The author synthesizes existing literature to identify four specific criteria that impact the practical relevance of costing methods: cost traceability, cost causality, exhaustiveness of cost centers, and cost/value articulation. Two of these criteria (cost traceability and cost causality) have been previously recognized in the literature, while the others are newly identified through the author’s research  .

2. Theoretical Framework Development: The author proposes a model for analyzing the practical relevance of costing methods by amalgamating insights from past studies. This involves establishing a matrix that helps cross-reference and contextualize three forms of practical relevance (conceptual, legitimative, and instrumental), which enrich the understanding of costing methods in management accounting  .

3. Formulation of Research Questions and Objectives: By critically reviewing earlier works, the author sets up a clear research question aimed at exploring how the technical characteristics of costing methods can be analyzed and improved—a synthesis of empirical and theoretical perspectives that guides the study's focus .

4. Contextualization in Healthcare Setting: The author places the discussion of costing methods within the specific context of healthcare, connecting findings from broader management accounting literature to the unique challenges and requirements faced by healthcare organizations. This contextualization emphasizes the practical implications of existing theoretical frameworks  .

5. Call for Further Research: The author highlights gaps in the current research landscape regarding the technical aspects of costing methods and encourages future studies to build upon the established findings, thus integrating insights from various strands of literature to propel the field forward .

Through these synthesis efforts, the author effectively connects theoretical constructs with practical implications, providing a comprehensive understanding of the relevance of costing methods in healthcare management accounting."

My question 4: "What academic evaluation efforts have been made on specific concepts and theories in the literature review by the author?"

The reply: "In the literature review, the author engages in several academic evaluation efforts concerning specific concepts and theories related to costing methods and their practical relevance. These efforts can be categorized as follows:

1. Critical Analysis of Management Accounting Techniques: The author evaluates early critiques of management accounting practices, particularly those articulated by Johnson and Kaplan, regarding their inadequacy and irrelevance. This evaluation frames the current understanding of management accounting techniques and emphasizes the need for more robust methods of cost analysis .

2. Conceptual Clarity on Practical Relevance: The author assesses the ambiguity surrounding the definition and measurement of relevance within management accounting literature. By referencing scholars like Lukka and Suomala, the author provides an academic evaluation of how relevance is constructed and perceived, arguing for clearer metrics and a more structured approach to establishing practical relevance  .

3. Framework for Analyzing Costing Methods: The author supports the evaluation of theoretical frameworks by proposing a novel matrix for analyzing the practical relevance of costing methods. This framework is positioned against the backdrop of three established forms of practical relevance (conceptual, legitimative, and instrumental), allowing for a richer dialogue between theory and application  .

4. Incorporation of Empirical Evidence: The synthesis includes an evaluation of previous empirical studies that have examined the accuracy of healthcare costing methods. The author critiques the concentration on accuracy alone and discusses the importance of understanding cost origin (causality) and resource consumption patterns (traceability), identifying a gap in the literature that necessitates further investigation   .

5. Discussion of Novel Criteria: The author highlights two new criteria (exhaustiveness of cost centers and cost/value articulation) that emerge from the research, providing a critical evaluation of their significance in enhancing the practical relevance of costing methods. This discussion indicates an evaluation of existing literature while demonstrating the contribution of the current study to the field  .

6. Implications for Future Research: By critically evaluating the findings and gaps within the existing literature, the author emphasizes the need for ongoing research to refine the understanding of costing methods. This evaluative perspective encourages scholars to explore connections between theoretical constructs and their practical applications, thereby contributing to the advancement of knowledge in the field .

Through these evaluations, the author critically engages with existing theories and concepts, articulating a comprehensive perspective that aims to improve the practical relevance of costing methods in management accounting."

My question 5: "How did the literature review findings of the author inform the design of the research methodology in the article?"

The reply: "The literature review findings significantly informed the design of the research methodology in the article in several key ways:

1. Identification of Research Gaps: The literature review highlighted gaps in the current understanding of practical relevance related to costing methods, particularly in their application in healthcare settings. By recognizing that existing studies largely focus on accuracy and causality but often overlook other crucial aspects (such as exhaustiveness of cost centers and cost/value articulation), the author designed a research methodology that aims to fill these gaps and provide a more comprehensive analysis  .

2. Framework Development: The findings from the literature review led to the creation of a practical relevance analysis matrix. This framework serves as a structured tool for analyzing the technical characteristics of costing methods and their impact on practical relevance. The matrix was developed based on theoretical knowledge derived from the literature, facilitating a systematic approach to examining the relationships between various criteria and their implications for costing methods  .

3. Three-Step Interventionist Research Approach: The author incorporated insights from the literature to shape a three-step interventionist research methodology. This approach includes defining the practical problem, explaining the effects of the intervention, and analyzing these effects post-intervention. The design reflects the need for a methodology that allows for both theoretical and practical evaluations, as reiterated in the literature  .

4. Event-Based Immersion and Distancing Phases: Drawing from the literature's discussion of interventionist research practices, the methodology includes distinct phases of immersion (to gather initial insights and perceptions) and distancing (to analyze the data objectively). The author acknowledges that both induction and deduction are crucial in structured research, a concept derived from previous studies. This design ensures that the research findings are robust and reflective of real-world applications  .

5. Inclusion of Diverse Stakeholders: The literature review underscored the importance of participation from various stakeholders in the analysis of costing methods and their relevance. Therefore, the methodology involved a task force composed of management accountants and other relevant personnel, ensuring diverse perspectives were considered in the research process. This participatory approach aligns with the findings from previous studies that stress the need for collaborative analysis in management accounting  .

6. Focus on Practical Application: The literature review findings reinforced the idea that the practical relevance of costing methods is contingent upon their technical characteristics. Consequently, the research methodology was designed not only to analyze these characteristics quantitatively but also to contextualize them within the operational framework of the healthcare sector, ensuring that the outcomes are relevant and actionable  .

By integrating these insights from the literature review, the author established a research methodology that is coherent, reflective of existing theoretical frameworks, and capable of yielding practical insights for improving costing methods in healthcare management."

My question 6: "How did the literature review result of the author support the analysis of the research methodology findings in the article?"

The reply: "The literature review findings supported the analysis of the research methodology findings in the article in several critical ways:

1. Foundation for Criteria Identification: The literature review provided a theoretical underpinning for the identification of four key criteria (cost traceability, cost causality, exhaustiveness of cost centers, and cost/value articulation) that would be used to analyze the practical relevance of costing methods. By establishing these criteria through a review of existing literature, the author was able to substantiate their relevance and necessity in the analysis, thereby ensuring that the research methodology findings were grounded in established theories and concepts  .

2. Validation of Methodological Framework: The matrix for analyzing practical relevance, developed as a result of the literature review, served as a methodological framework to evaluate the data collected during the research. The framework's design reflected insights gleaned from prior studies, which helped ensure the methodology was comprehensive and addressed the identified gaps in knowledge, thus validating the overall research approach  .

3. Reflection of Existing Scholarly Conversations: The literature review highlighted existing scholarly discussions around the limitations of previous costing methods in healthcare. This context enabled the author to analyze how the proposed methodology built upon or challenged these existing discussions. The alignment of the research findings with literature trends allowed for critical reflections on how new elements introduced in the research contribute to ongoing academic conversations about costing methods  .

4. Benchmarking Against Established Knowledge: The findings from the literature review allowed the author to benchmark their research methodology against established knowledge in the field. By referencing prior works that pointed out the inadequacies of existing costing methods, the author could analyze their own methodology in light of these critiques, illustrating how their approach aimed to enhance practical relevance compared to earlier methods [T9].

5. Empirical Evidence Correlation: The literature review revealed that many previous studies emphasized the importance of improving accuracy in costing methods due to fundamental issues related to cost origins and consumption patterns. This background informed the analysis conducted in the methodology by allowing the author to relate empirical evidence derived from the research with theoretical expectations set forth in the literature. The research findings could thus be contextualized within broader trends observed in prior studies  .

6. Implications for Future Research Directions: The analysis of the research methodology findings benefited from literature-derived insights about the need for an ongoing exploration of practical relevance in various contexts. By framing findings within existing scholarly frameworks and acknowledged gaps, the author not only supported their analysis but also pointed towards future research avenues that could further investigate these emerging criteria and frameworks in different settings or sectors [T9].

In summary, the literature review findings provided both a foundation and a critical lens through which to analyze the outcomes of the research methodology, ensuring that the author’s findings are both relatable to existing knowledge and positioned to advance the field of management accounting further."

My question 7: "Did the literature review results include specific personal voice of the author in the literature review discussion?"

The reply: "The literature review results in the article seem to focus primarily on presenting existing research and theories relevant to the topic of costing methods and their practical relevance without a strong emphasis on the personal voice of the author. Instead, the review synthesizes various scholarly contributions and highlights gaps in the literature while providing a clear rationale for the research approach taken in the study.

1. Objective Tone: The author maintains an objective and academic tone throughout the literature review, emphasizing the findings and ideas of previous researchers rather than inserting personal opinions or perspectives. For instance, the discussion of the criteria for practical relevance is grounded in existing literature, and the author cites various studies to support the conceptual framework presented  .

2. Focus on Contributions: The literature review appears to aim primarily at integrating and summarizing existing knowledge, particularly regarding the practical relevance of costing methods. While synthesizing literature, the author does not seem to elaborate on personal interpretations or subjective viewpoints but rather emphasizes what past research indicates and how it leads to the current study's objectives  .

3. Evidence-Based Approach: The review leans heavily on established theories and findings from other scholars, which frames the research within a broader scholarly context without much personal commentary. The author's voice may be present in the choices made regarding which studies to highlight and how to frame the discussion, but these choices appear to serve the overarching narrative of justifying the research rather than expressing personal viewpoints  .

4. Contribution to Field: While the author does position their work as a response to gaps in the literature, this positioning aligns more with academic convention than personal expression. The emphasis is on showing the relevance of their approach in advancing the field rather than providing subjective insights or experiences  .

In conclusion, while the author's interpretative choices and framing of the literature could reflect their perspective, the literature review largely does not convey a distinct personal voice. Instead, it presents a scholarly synthesis aimed at justifying the significance of the research conducted."

Reference: a collection of blog notes on using chatgpt for research purpose.