The problem of generalizability: anecdotes and evidence in accounting research

Abstract

Generalization in accounting research is always suspect as the social context and institutions of accounting change over time and space. However, exactly for this reason, there are a number of different ways to reach pragmatic and somewhat generalizable results. No research programme or approach has an absolute upper hand in understanding the true dynamics of economic development. The genuine puzzle of inductive reasoning creates a rhetorical element for all attempts to generalize in accounting research. The main rhetorics used in accounting studies are statistical, contextual, and constructive generalization. To put it in broad terms, statistical generalization rhetoric relies on formal arguments brought from a mathematical theory, contextual generalization rhetoric is based on understanding of the historical and institutional context, and constructive generalization relies on the diffusion of innovation. Combining the often silenced opportunities of contextual or constructive generalization rhetorics in case studies, and noticing the typically omitted problems of statistical generalization rhetoric, argues that these research approaches are not as far from each other as current methodological discussion would suggest. On the contrary, argues that in terms of generalization, both case and statistical studies face the same obstacles of justifying real induction, and both approaches, if conducted properly, have a chance of producing results that are generalizable to some extent.

Social research evolution in management accounting: reflection using Bunge’s theory

“…Different authors have defended the convenience of achieving a theoretical saturation with case studies (Eisenhardt, 1989;Lukka and Kansen, 1995). We think that the potential for generalizing from case studies is greater than is commonly considered.…”

The changes to accounting education and accounting educators as a result of changes in the Spanish university system: A case study using an institutional theory approach

“…Also, Dacin et al (2002) and Zilber (2002) recommend its use to study specifically institutional change. Although a single case study is limited with respect to statistical generalisability Lukka and Kasanen (1995) and Granlund (2001, p. 144) indicate that it 'offers opportunities for in-depth observation and analysis of a complicated research phenomenon in a way that permits contextual generalisability'.…”

The consideration of environmental matters in the audit of financial reports

“…Hence, in accordance with Axiom 14: special criteria for worthiness (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) (refer to section 4.2.2), there is a requirement to confirm that the interview evidence provides a credible constitution of reality (Silverman, 2005). Credibility is enhanced by theoretical generalisability (Lukka & Kasanen, 1995). Spicer (1992) and Daly and Lumley (2002) explained that generalisability entails generalising back to theory.…”