This paper reviews whistleblowing experimental research in accounting and management and provides methodological guidance to new scholars. Based on a sample of 49 experimental papers, we summarized key issues, such as research design, task, dependent variable, and subject selection. Overall, we find that journals classified as accounting are more concentrated in experimental research and management journals are more diverse in terms of methodologies. Thus, whistleblowing experimental research from both areas is largely characterized by vignette-based studies. Accounting articles focused primarily on misappropriation of assets and fraudulent financial reporting, whereas management articles focused more broadly on unethical behavior. Also, some articles controlled for social desirability bias on the dependent variable. Finally, there is a predominance of the use of M.B.A. and postgraduate students in accounting studies and undergraduate studies in management. This paper is intended to further our understanding of experimental design choices and facilitate future research in this emerging field.

You do not currently have access to this content.