On the Evolution of Theory Construction in Accounting: a Personal Account

Mattessich, Richard

doi:10.1080/00014788.1979.9728780

Cited by 13 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…38-39, Chambers, 1973a; Hakansson, 1973, pp. 156-58; Holthausen and Watts, 2001; Mattessich, 1978, 1980, p. 168), the problems involved in testing accounting outputs as predictions in this manner are legion, including: difficulty in conceptualising, operationalising and measuring the target effects; bounded knowledge of means-ends relations; highly complex interactions between the factors involved; the need to specify counterfactuals or manage control groups; reflexivity; and the need to examine outcomes in aggregate rather than individually (for example in addressing cost-benefit considerations and the riskiness of portfolios). Indeed, most writers discuss this sort of testing only to point to the strict impossibility of achieving it to scientific standards, the better to draw attention to the allegedly unscientific nature of classical accounting thought.…”

Section: The Structure Of Classical Accounting Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The structure I describe here might be termed defeasible postulationism , the second term, and in a rather broad way the conception itself, being derived from the work of Mattessich (1980; Gaffikin, 1988, p. 21). Defeasible postulationism is a very catholic approach, open to variety in both the methods used and the direction of the derivative flow through the structure.…”

Section: The Structure Of Classical Accounting Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One significant influence on golden-age thinking was the recent history of elevated levels of inflation experienced in the USA and elsewhere (Lee, 2008), and a major focus of its theories was the measurement of income and capital under conditions of fluctuating prices. Some golden-age theorists at least (Mattessich, 1980) recognized that their theorising was postulational and some also showed a real commitment to defeasibility.…”

Section: The Development Of Classical Accounting Thoughtmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although he is often counted among the important golden-age theorists (Gaffikin, 2003), Mattessich’s major efforts were actually devoted to building a generalized “uninterpreted or semi-interpreted calculus” (Mattessich, 1980, p. 165) suitable for theory-building in accounting but quite deliberately separate from actual theories (Gaffikin, 2003). His remarks do reflect, however, a recognition of the role of defeasibility; he argues, for example, that “competent empirical research could enormously enrich theory construction and theory testing in accounting; above all empirical research is indispensable for the teleologic interpretations of the general theory” (Mattessich, 1980, p. 168, emphasis in original).…”

Section: The Development Of Classical Accounting Thoughtmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Metaphysics, methodology and theory in classical accounting thought

Rutherford

2019

MEDAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The received wisdom on classical accounting thought is that its early stages were methodologically vacuous, while, in its “golden” age, it espoused the methods and philosophical commitments of received-view hypothetico-deductivism but actually remained methodologically incoherent. The purpose of this paper is to argue, to the contrary, that classical accounting thought possesses a coherent constitutional structure that qualifies as a methodology and unifies it as a body of argument. Design/methodology/approach The paper draws on Cartwright’s metaphysical nomological pluralism, which holds that we should attend to the actual practices of successful inquiry and the methodologies and metaphysical presuppositions that support it. Findings The paper argues that accounting does achieve disciplinary success and that classical accounting thought, using the methodology of defeasible postulationism, provides the theoretical infrastructure that supports that success. The accounting domain is a world of “dappled realism”, in which theories are useful in the construction of reporting schemes and inform our understanding of the nature of the domain. Research limitations/implications Applying metaphysical nomological pluralism rescues classical accounting thought from the charge of methodological incoherence and metaphysical naivety. Originality/value The paper justifies a place for classical accounting theorising in the endeavours of modern accounting scholarship and moves the analysis of classical accounting thought within a philosophy of science framework towards an approach with a contemporary resonance.

show abstract

Section: The Structure Of Classical Accounting Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Structure Of Classical Accounting Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Development Of Classical Accounting Thoughtmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Development Of Classical Accounting Thoughtmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Metaphysics, methodology and theory in classical accounting thought

Rutherford

2019

MEDAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…27) writes : ''Broadly speaking , where there is change knowledge about process will be valued over information about structure thus favouring the case study . '' This point would explain why it is only during the 1970s that empirical research in accounting came to the fore (Mattessich , 1980) , if there is indeed an approaching CRT regime .…”

Section: Working With Crt : 2 Developments In Accountancy Professiomentioning

confidence: 99%