RES 6521 Module 5 Complete Chapter 3 Example

Chapter 3: Research Method for a Study of How Remote Work and Perceived Support Relate to Accountants' Plans to Leave Their Firms

Student Name

American College of Education

RES6521: Research Methodology

Module 5 Assignment

Instructor Name

November 9, 2026

Introduction

Public accounting firms adopted hybrid arrangements quickly, yet many still struggle to keep staff and senior accountants beyond their first few years. This study examines whether the proportion of working time accountants spend outside the office is associated with how strongly they intend to leave, and whether their belief that the firm values and supports them alters that association. This chapter explains how the study will be carried out: the method and design, the participants and how they will be found, the measures, the procedures for gathering and analyzing data, the threats to the validity of the conclusions and the protections for participants.

Research Method and Design

The study is quantitative and uses a nonexperimental, cross-sectional correlational design delivered as a one-time online survey. A quantitative approach suits questions about the direction and strength of relationships among measured variables, and a correlational design is required because work arrangements are set by firms and individuals rather than by a researcher. An experiment was impractical and ethically awkward, a longitudinal panel exceeded the time and access available and an interview study would not test the moderation hypothesis. The design supports conclusions about association and moderation but not causation, and results will be described in those terms.

Population and Sample

The intended population is staff and senior accountants at U.S. CPA firms employing 20 to 299 professionals that permit some remote work. Recruitment runs through early-career groups in three state CPA societies in the Midwest plus two LinkedIn communities, using purposive selection with capped referral because no roster of this population exists. Eligibility requires a staff or senior title in audit, tax or advisory, at least six months at the current firm and permission to work remotely; managers and above, and employees of the researcher's firm, are excluded. A power analysis for the interaction term, assuming f-squared of .05 with seven predictors, indicated 159 participants (Faul et al., 2009); the study aims for 160 usable responses from about 195 started surveys.

Instrumentation

Remote work intensity is a respondent-reported percentage of paid hours worked away from firm offices in a typical non-busy-season month, an approach consistent with the telecommuting literature's emphasis on extent (Gajendran & Harrison, 2007). Perceived organizational support is measured with eight items from the Survey of Perceived Organizational Support (Eisenberger et al., 1986), whose short forms have produced findings consistent with the full scale (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). Turnover intention is measured with the six-item Turnover Intention Scale, whose scores separated later leavers from stayers in its validation (Bothma & Roodt, 2013). Tenure, age, busy-season weekly hours and firm size band serve as controls. Both scales will be checked for reliability and distinctness in this sample, and a pilot with eight accountants will test the study-written items.

Data Collection and Analysis

The survey will open in late May, after the spring deadlines, and remain available for six weeks with two reminders. Data will be cleaned with a written R script under rules fixed in advance for eligibility, attention checks, unusually fast completion and missing values. After descriptive statistics, reliability estimates, a two-factor confirmatory model and checks of regression assumptions, a three-step hierarchical regression will enter the controls, then the centered predictor and moderator, then their product (Aiken & West, 1991). If the product term is significant, its pattern will be traced through conditional slopes and a Johnson-Neyman region (Hayes, 2022), and a marker item will gauge how much shared method variance colors the correlations (Lindell & Whitney, 2001).

Threats to Validity

Internal validity. Because the design is correlational, a third variable such as commuting distance or family caregiving could drive both remote work and intentions. Controls reduce but cannot remove this threat, and reverse direction is possible: accountants already planning to leave may seek remote arrangements. Conclusions will therefore be stated as associations.

External validity. A purposive sample recruited mainly through Midwestern networks may differ from the national population. The sample's makeup will be compared with profession-level descriptions, and results will be framed for accountants like those who took part.

Construct validity. Intention is a proxy for departure, and the support scale was not built for accountants. Predictive evidence for the turnover scale and a factor analysis in the present sample partly address these concerns.

Statistical conclusion validity. The sample is powered for a small-to-medium interaction; a smaller real effect could be missed, so a nonsignificant interaction will be reported with its confidence interval rather than as evidence of no effect. Single-source data may inflate correlations; procedural remedies in the survey layout and the marker-variable adjustment address this (Podsakoff et al., 2003).

Ethical Procedures

The proposal will be submitted to the American College of Education IRB, and no recruitment will begin before approval. The main risk to participants is reputational: an employer learning that an accountant has considered leaving. The survey therefore collects no names, firm names or cities, and invitations will never pass through firm systems. Consent information explains the study's purpose, the time required, the voluntary nature of every item and the right to stop at any time. The gift card drawing uses a separate form that cannot be linked to survey answers, and drawing entries will be deleted after prizes are sent. The study excludes the researcher's own firm, removing the risk that supervisees feel obliged to respond. Data will be held on encrypted storage for five years and then destroyed, and only group-level results will appear in any report.

Role of the Researcher

As an audit senior manager, I hold views about remote work formed by supervising hybrid teams, and those views could shape how items are worded or how results are read. Three safeguards limit that influence. The published scales are used without changes, so my wording enters only the remote work and control items, which were reviewed in the pilot. The hypotheses and analysis rules are fixed in this chapter before any data arrive. And a doctoral peer outside accounting will review the Chapter 4 draft to check that each statement about the findings matches the tables. Because no participant works at my firm or reports to me, my role creates no direct power over anyone who responds.

Assumptions and Delimitations

The study assumes that participants answer honestly when anonymity is assured, that they can estimate their remote work percentage with reasonable accuracy and that the published scales measure the same constructs among accountants as in their original samples. It is delimited to staff and senior accountants in mid-sized firms, to one point in time after busy season, to intention rather than turnover and to perceived organizational support as the single moderator, leaving other possible moderators, such as supervisor support or career stage, for later work.

Summary

This chapter described a one-time survey of early-career accountants in mid-sized American firms, with a target of 160 usable answers chosen to power the moderation test. Remote work intensity, perceived organizational support and turnover intention are measured with a study-built item and two established scales, and the analysis plan proceeds through preset cleaning rules to a three-step moderated regression. Threats to each type of validity, and the steps taken against them, were stated, along with protections for participants whose answers concern their own plans to leave. Chapter 4 will report the results.

References

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. SAGE Publications.

Bothma, C. F. C., & Roodt, G. (2013). The validation of the turnover intention scale. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 11(1), Article 507. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajhrm.v11i1.507

Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 500-507. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.500

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using GPower 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41*(4), 1149-1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149

Gajendran, R. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2007). The good, the bad, and the unknown about telecommuting: Meta-analysis of psychological mediators and individual consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1524-1541. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1524

Hayes, A. F. (2022). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.

Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114-121. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.114

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 698-714. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.698