Properly identified imaginary needs, an inaccurately proposed methodology: The case of Rochester school of accountancy’s positive accounting methodology

K. Al-Adeem
{"title":"Properly identified imaginary needs, an inaccurately proposed methodology: The case of Rochester school of accountancy’s positive accounting methodology","authors":"K. Al-Adeem","doi":"10.24818/jamis.2021.04003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research Question: Whether accounting research has been in a better status after the domination of Rochester School of Accountancy’s Positive Accounting Methodology. Motivation: This study revisits the debate of the validity of Rochester school of accountancy's positive methodology. Rochester school of accountancy's positive accounting research has properly identified the assumed imaginary need of the US market. While positive accounting methodology may not be scientific under various accounts for science, it has contributed to accounting methodologically. Idea: Restricting financial accounting on issues related to decision-usefulness and perceiving corporate reporting as a product of accounting choices from an agency theory perspective constrains other dimensions of reality. Any restrictions to definitions of the role of accounting and its function (Glauter & Underdowen, 1974) blocks profoundly deep-rooted in contextual factors such as a country's social, political, and economic environment that all make up accounting which supposedly needs to be considered (Hellmann et al., 2010) in properly theorizing comprehensively practiced accounting. Data: Extensive writings have that documented internationally throughout time have been looked over. Tools: An analytical and critical examination has been conducted upon internationally accounting literature in a wide-ranging manner to provide an evaluation regarding Rochester school of accountancy's positive accounting research. Findings: The positive accounting methodology of the Rochester school of accountancy has been criticized by several accounting researchers for decades and even deem it disappointment and probably shame. Yet, Watts and Zimmerman declared themselves prime candidates. Its prevalence is the rhetoric of scientific inquiry. A measure of the failure of the so-called positive accounting methodology has achieved lays in its inability to become universal because differences in institutional environments persevere in the world. Contribution: Revisiting the debate of the validity of Rochester school of accountancy's positive methodology potentially contributes to our knowledge in assessing its legitimate prevalence in academic accounting research. New accounting researchers and scholars need to be aware of the predominant theoretical structure that governs the empirical financial paradigm and its limitation. This is especially significant to accounting researcher who has been intellectually trained under the positivistic tradition of economics.","PeriodicalId":14716,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Accounting and Management Information Systems","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Accounting and Management Information Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24818/jamis.2021.04003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Research Question: Whether accounting research has been in a better status after the domination of Rochester School of Accountancy’s Positive Accounting Methodology. Motivation: This study revisits the debate of the validity of Rochester school of accountancy's positive methodology. Rochester school of accountancy's positive accounting research has properly identified the assumed imaginary need of the US market. While positive accounting methodology may not be scientific under various accounts for science, it has contributed to accounting methodologically. Idea: Restricting financial accounting on issues related to decision-usefulness and perceiving corporate reporting as a product of accounting choices from an agency theory perspective constrains other dimensions of reality. Any restrictions to definitions of the role of accounting and its function (Glauter & Underdowen, 1974) blocks profoundly deep-rooted in contextual factors such as a country's social, political, and economic environment that all make up accounting which supposedly needs to be considered (Hellmann et al., 2010) in properly theorizing comprehensively practiced accounting. Data: Extensive writings have that documented internationally throughout time have been looked over. Tools: An analytical and critical examination has been conducted upon internationally accounting literature in a wide-ranging manner to provide an evaluation regarding Rochester school of accountancy's positive accounting research. Findings: The positive accounting methodology of the Rochester school of accountancy has been criticized by several accounting researchers for decades and even deem it disappointment and probably shame. Yet, Watts and Zimmerman declared themselves prime candidates. Its prevalence is the rhetoric of scientific inquiry. A measure of the failure of the so-called positive accounting methodology has achieved lays in its inability to become universal because differences in institutional environments persevere in the world. Contribution: Revisiting the debate of the validity of Rochester school of accountancy's positive methodology potentially contributes to our knowledge in assessing its legitimate prevalence in academic accounting research. New accounting researchers and scholars need to be aware of the predominant theoretical structure that governs the empirical financial paradigm and its limitation. This is especially significant to accounting researcher who has been intellectually trained under the positivistic tradition of economics.
正确识别假想需求,一个不准确提出的方法:罗切斯特会计学院的积极会计方法的案例
研究问题:在罗彻斯特会计学派的实证会计方法论占据主导地位后,会计研究是否处于更好的地位?动机:本研究回顾了对罗切斯特会计学院实证方法论有效性的争论。罗切斯特会计学院的实证会计研究正确地识别了美国市场的假想需求。虽然积极的会计方法在科学的各种帐户下可能不科学,但它对会计方法做出了贡献。观点:从代理理论的角度来看,将财务会计限制在决策有用性相关的问题上,并将公司报告视为会计选择的产物,约束了现实的其他维度。对会计角色及其功能定义的任何限制(Glauter & underdownen, 1974)都阻碍了根深蒂固的背景因素,如一个国家的社会、政治和经济环境,这些因素都构成了会计,在适当地理论化全面实践的会计时,这些因素应该被考虑(Hellmann et al., 2010)。数据:广泛的著作已经记录了国际上整个时间已经看了。工具:对国际会计文献进行了广泛的分析和批判性检查,以提供有关罗切斯特会计学院积极会计研究的评估。研究发现:几十年来,罗切斯特会计学院的积极会计方法一直受到几位会计研究人员的批评,甚至认为它令人失望,甚至可能是可耻的。然而,瓦茨和齐默尔曼宣称自己是主要候选人。它的流行是科学探究的修辞。衡量所谓的积极会计方法的失败在于,由于制度环境的差异在世界范围内持续存在,它无法成为普遍的。贡献:重新审视罗切斯特会计学院的积极方法论的有效性的辩论可能有助于我们在评估其在学术会计研究中的合法流行的知识。新的会计研究人员和学者需要了解支配经验金融范式的主要理论结构及其局限性。这对于在经济学实证主义传统下受过智力训练的会计研究者来说尤为重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信