Ferdowsi University of Mashhad Iranian Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance 2717-4131 10 3 2026 08 01 Financial Stress Research Under the Magnitude Mind Lens 201 221 48223 10.22067/ijaaf.2026.48223.1647 EN Taqi Al Abduwani Department of Business and Management Studies, Faculty of Management, Gulf College, Muscat, Oman 0009-0007-4830-8062 Shima Ebrahimi Department of Persian Language and Literature, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran 0000-0003-3528-1386 Iliya Pishghadam Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran Journal Article 2025 12 05 This study applied the Magnitude Mind Model (MMM) to evaluate the quality of cross-sectional financial stress literature beyond traditional methodological checklists. The MMM integrates magnitude thinking (SICHA: Scale, Impact, Complexity, Holism, Accuracy) with measures of intellectual humility (acknowledging uncertainty, context, and specific limitations) and hubris (simple causal claims, overgeneralization, false certainty). Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we consecutively selected the first 20 open-access English-language, Scopus Q1/Q2-indexed cross-sectional studies on financial stress published between 2015 and 2025 from a pool of 670 records. Two independent raters scored each paper on the 11 MMM sub-items, achieving excellent inter-rater reliability. Results suggested that, within this exploratory sample, only 10% of papers attained a high Magnitude Mind score, whereas 45% scored low. Hubris was the strongest correlate of MM scores in exploratory analyses. Low-MM papers frequently used causal language such as "causes" and "impacts" from cross-sectional data, overgeneralized findings from convenience samples, and presented generic limitation statements. Holism was the weakest SICHA sub-item, with 50% of papers scoring low. Analytical methods did not guarantee epistemic quality; two methodologically complex papers scored low due to extreme hubris. Temporal analysis revealed no significant improvement from 2015 to 2025. Within this sample, 45% of papers were classified as Low MM. The MMM may offer a potentially useful diagnostic and prescriptive tool for researchers, reviewers, and editors to promote more rigorous, humble, and credible science. https://ijaaf.um.ac.ir/article_48223_6f497db742b82253d9cf8c89073da954.pdf