Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Empirical research in accounting: alternative approaches and a case for “middle‐range” thinking

Empirical research in accounting: alternative approaches and a case for “middle‐range” thinking Empirical research in accounting is of considerable importance to the academic community yet it is surprising to note that it is only since the early 1970s that this concern has gained centre stage. Since this time multiple studies have been undertaken from a variety of different theoretical and methodological perspectives. The literature is now replete with empirical studies from perspectives as far apart as the “positivism” of the Rochester School to the expanding Foucauldian studies of accounting practice. While this eclecticism is commendable at one level it is also confusing at another. Reduces some of this confusion by bringing an overview and much needed order into this variety highlighting the underlying features of these multiple approaches to accounting research. Points out the need for choices to be made on the perspective to be adopted along three continuums concerning “theory”, “methodology” and “change”. Presents a case for “middle‐range” thinking for empirical research in accounting. While the reader may not necessarily agree with the logic that leads to this perspective it is hoped that the article will demonstrate that no one perspective can provide a complete picture of accounting reality, that choices on perspective have to be, and can be, made and that these choices are, and should be, contestable. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal Emerald Publishing

Empirical research in accounting: alternative approaches and a case for “middle‐range” thinking

Download PDF
25 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/empirical-research-in-accounting-alternative-approaches-and-a-case-for-y9G4XQ2CAc

References (54)

Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 MCB UP Ltd. All rights reserved.
ISSN
0951-3574
DOI
10.1108/09513579510146707
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Empirical research in accounting is of considerable importance to the academic community yet it is surprising to note that it is only since the early 1970s that this concern has gained centre stage. Since this time multiple studies have been undertaken from a variety of different theoretical and methodological perspectives. The literature is now replete with empirical studies from perspectives as far apart as the “positivism” of the Rochester School to the expanding Foucauldian studies of accounting practice. While this eclecticism is commendable at one level it is also confusing at another. Reduces some of this confusion by bringing an overview and much needed order into this variety highlighting the underlying features of these multiple approaches to accounting research. Points out the need for choices to be made on the perspective to be adopted along three continuums concerning “theory”, “methodology” and “change”. Presents a case for “middle‐range” thinking for empirical research in accounting. While the reader may not necessarily agree with the logic that leads to this perspective it is hoped that the article will demonstrate that no one perspective can provide a complete picture of accounting reality, that choices on perspective have to be, and can be, made and that these choices are, and should be, contestable.

Journal

Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal – Emerald Publishing

Published: Mar 1, 1995

Keywords: Accounting research; Methods; Philosophy

There are no references for this article.