660-833-5563

Critical accounting theory article

There are numerous grounds there is absolutely no 1 generally accepted theory of accounting. The grounds happen to be of two kinds. The very first is philosophical. The second is practical. This essay discusses each of these. That so delivers illustrations from accounting theory.

Remember: This is just a sample from a fellow student. Your time is important. Let us write you an essay from scratch

Get essay help

The assertion There is no globally accepted accounting theory applies by explanation. Scientific apprehension of the term theory denies that any theory can be universally approved.

Harmonizing to Popper ( e. g., 2002a, 2002b ), theories are speculations that are put to the trial. If they are refuted by the trial, they are either rejected or refined. If they happen to be non refuted, they remain theories ( non specifics ). They are really so set to farther tests, and are further refined. To ensure this to keep, there must be rival theories. This way, theories compete in a procedure of Darwinian choice. The theories neer get to the reality, but they acquire increasingly closer.

This is the initially ground there is not any universally accepted theory of accounting. If perhaps there were a universally acknowledged theory of accounting, it will nt certainly be a theory. It will be something else.

Realize that, harmonizing to Popper, zero theory ever arrives at particular cognition. The best any theory can make is restrict ignorance. Furthermore, in the event that scientists were to detect a genuine theory, there is no manner they can cognize it had been true, thus at that place would still be viing theories.

This last stage demands extreme. G A, ouml, del s rawness theorems ( see, e. g., Hofstadter, 1979 ) demonstrate that, in any system of logic rich plenty to include formal math there exists a great infinite physique of claims that are accurate but which can be impossible, in rule, to get the system to cognize being true. This implies, in useful footings, that in any intricate system-for illustration, an economic system-there exist methods to jobs that are known by the system, tend to be non well-known by any individual within this. This is appreciated by taking financial experts ( e. g., Hayek, lates 1970s ). Additional, given that there exist normally boundlessly more incorrect methods to jobs than right solutions to jobs, any kind of effort to work through such jobs by ordre is boundlessly more likely to take to failure than to achievement. As areas economic sciences, this led Hayek ( 1944 ) to his bridal with the free industry. As respects theory in scientific self-discipline, it means that any efforts to implement a person theory on anything probably will take to a earnestly inappropriate theory. This really is another earth for assuming there can be no universally recognized theory of accounting. Virtually any universally accepted theory may merely always be universally accepted if it were imposed by simply diktat, and, if it had been imposed by diktat, it would of need most likely always be incorrect. So that it would give rise to a rival theory.

Associated with this, Feyerabend ( mil novecentos e noventa e seis ) states that there is none in the world as a individual scientific approach, and that virtually any effort to enforce you are counter-productive. Feyerabend s cortège of clinical discipline is summarised since anything moves. This, supplies another surface for delete word no specific theory of accounting. In the event there can be simply no universally recognized method, there can be no globally accepted theory.

There are two popular positions of clinical discipline that are in struggle with Popper t position: positivism and postmodernism. Positivism is the doctrine, linked to Ayer ( 1946 ) that says that the single meaningful transactions are those that are authentic by common sense and those which may be verified simply by observation. This is actually the confirmation secret. The initially job together with the confirmation regulation is that it is neither a truth of logic nor an through empirical remark verifiable truth, hence by simply its ain footings it really is non-meaningful. The 2nd job is that in signifies science results inductively. Nevertheless inductive logic ( drawing general decisions from specific cases ) is mistaken: a million findings of light swans, for instance, does low show that all swans will be white ( so , they may be nt: some swans will be black ).

Postmodernism is definitely the doctrine that world is socially constructed. So what can be existent to one individual can be unreal to a new. At a fiddling level, this is true, several people start to see the same items in different methods. It is besides true that, historically, technological discipline advanced in some cases by alterations in universe position, or paradigm ( Kuhn, 1996 ). However , this can be a query more of the sociology of clinical discipline, low of ontology. And taken literally postmodernism is ridiculous. It contributes to the decision there is no such thing as world.

The prevalence of viing procession of science-Popperism, positivism, and postmodernism-provides another ground for there being simply no universally approved theory of accounting. You cannot find any universally recognized position of what comprises world. As a result one should predict there to be different ideas of accounting, each having its cell of protagonists.

You will find three intents for any theory of accounting, and each makes different needs on the theory.

The first is that accounting should supply the best information about a company s place. Such a theory is definitely normative, in that it suggests how best comptrollers will need to provide their very own trade. These kinds of a point of view is said to be normative. A normative theory is the one that states precisely what is best design.

A theory of accounting may besides seek to show what comptrollers do. Any kind of scientific self-discipline must incorporate accurate explanations. It is realistically possible for an investigation worker to stick to a descriptive theory yet deplore the simple fact that comptrollers do nt follow what the research member of staff considers the right ( we. e., ordre ) pattern.

There is an additional facet to descriptive theories. Until the arriving of inexpensive processing machines, there was clearly no way that research workers could evaluate huge aggregations of explications. Furthermore, seriously frequently the informations were unavailable ( Gaffikin ), 2008 ). Computers possess changed this. This is another ground to get believing you cannot find any universally approved theory of accounting. A descriptive theory is merely every bit good because the information National into it. Nonetheless it is difficult to analyze all the details, merely several blocks of informations. Diverse blocks may give rise in order to descriptions.

In depicting just how comptrollers behave, research workers must garner argument. But what environment? And how will need to research workers garner it? Positivists tend to use quantitative explications. These are infos that are, allegedly non-subjective, and might be portrayed numerically and manipulated statistically. Company gross revenues figures are an representation. Postmodernists usually utilize qualitative informations. They are informations that will make no claims to objectiveness and they are hard showing numerically. The findings of unstructured interviews-emotions, feelings, and so on-are illustrations of qualitative informations. Due to this, even when given the same reasons, different scientists may make diverse decisions. This can be another floor there is no globally accepted theory of accounting.

A theory of accounting can seek to explicate. This sort of theories will be scientific inside the Popperian sense, for they can be refuted. It can be logically possible for a research member of staff to believe that Theory you is the best informative theory, Theory 2 is the best descriptive theory, and Theory 3 is the best normative theory. Therefore once again there are many theories of accounting. Any study worker may well subscribe to three different theories, and do therefore without being sporadic.

In pattern, the difference between ordre, descriptive, and explanatory ideas is blurry. Any theory of one type may carry characteristics in the others.

This subdivision views discusses two illustration theories.

There are several careers with ordre theory. A single concerns what to come in. Consider assets. An comptroller really does non cognize how much a firm s property are suitable. So the curator uses one of many indexs ( historical price, for circumstance ). The comptroller must besides determine how much assets depreciate. Accountancy firm use methods to cipher depreciation-typically, successive line depreciation such that assets become useless after 3 old age groups. Such methods are merely freely accurate.

These kinds of considerations led Watts and Zimmerman ( 1978 ) to develop great accounting theory. The theory is in portion detailed, in that that states what real-world comptrollers do, and in portion informative, in that that purports to explicate why comptrollers behave in the manner they actually. The theory says, in consequence, that company accounts carry out non harmonize with world. Alternatively, they accord with what powerful involvements ( stakeholders, stockholders, administrators ) need others to view as world.

The theory makes two premises:

  • Homo economicus. This kind of states three things. Initially, people are wholly rational. Second, people act merely away of opportunism. Third, persons act only to maximize their particular wealth.
  • The efficient marketplace hypothesis ( EMH ). This states that, left to their ain gadgets ( i. e., in the event that unregulated ), the market offers an optimum monetary value for any good or service. The EMH claims that financial values agreement with all available information.

The ground great accounting theory makes these kinds of premises is that, without them, it is hard to do quantifiable anticipations, good results . them it truly is comparatively convenient. Therefore , for instance, with all of them one can foretell companies in one peculiar environment will try some fine different signifier of accounting from businesses in another sort of environment. Consequently , for illustration, Watts and Zimmerman ( 78 ) anticipate that homes whose net incomes will be increased by general value degree tweaked accounting ( GPLA ) will go against sb/sth ? disobey GPLA, nevertheless houses whose net incomes are lowered by GPLA will benefit it.

But the impression of H. economicus is problematic-some people are ridiculous, some are selfless, and so on ( Lunn, offered in Clark, 2008 ), The EMH is besides combative. Several economic experts accept it, others carry out nt. The EMH is besides imprecise. If the market is efficient, the EMH truly does nt point out how long it takes to make a dedication Besides, if the EMH were true, accommodement would be extremely hard. The best you can express about the premises is that they provide an approximate of world. How good an estimate it is, cipher knows. This is another surface there is no generally accepted theory of accounting. Some people believe the areas provide a very good estimate, a lot of people think they give a bad a single. Fama and French ( 2004 ) province that markets could be inefficient and investors could be ill-informed and irrational

Merely as proprietors, authoritiess, and workers have vested involvements, so have Watts and Zimmerman. In their instance, they are enthusiastic about advancing great accounting theory. So , to that end, the theory has a normative aspect. It concerns how accountancy research workers should pattern their very own trade. In the event all research workers follow Watts and Zimmerman s diktats, Watts and Zimmerman is going rich. Obviously, all accounting research workers wish to be in W and Zimmerman s place, but the single manner so they can make and so is to build a rival theory. This is one other ground there is not any universally acknowledged accounting theory.

Critical accounting theory is definitely nt truly a theory. It s more a manner of unfavorable view. It seeks, non merely to change accounting pattern, but to alter culture ( Gaffikin, 2008 ). It is politics. Therefore , for illustration, Laughlin ( cited in Davis, 2008 ) zone:

A critical pressure of the function of accounting procedures and patterns plus the accounting profession in the operation of society and administrations with an purpose to use that understanding to prosecute ( exactly where appropriate ) in modifying these methods, patterns and the profession.

In this, critical accounting theory can be postmodernist.

Postmodernists point to the legion defects in positive accounting theory. They focus on the failings in the constructs of H. economicus and the EMH. They will point out that Watts and Zimmerman use rhetorical gadgets to set the positions around. They argue that the methodological analysis and mensurating tools of rationalist theories will be rough, and so forth. Occasionally, they make ( or perhaps repetition ) good items ( electronic. g., the EMH is wrong ) ( electronic. g., Mouck, 1992 ).

As indicated, postmodernists reject the getting of non-subjective world. For making so , they deny associated with finding the real truth, or really worth, of any statement. Therefore they reject the truth, or worth, of postmodernism.

This can be the job with postmodernism. If world can be socially constructed, so right now there can non be a universally recognized theory, for socially constructed universe differs harmonizing to who may be making the constructing. An absolute theory to a single postmodernist is actually a false theory to all others.

That is why you cannot find any universally approved theory of accounting.

  • Ayer, A. J. ( 1946 ). Language, real truth and reasoning. ( subsequent ed. ). London: Gollancz.
  • Clark, Capital t. ( 08, November you ). Market lunacy. The Guardian.
  • Davis, D. ( 2008 ). Critical accounting theory. Lecture 9. Lecture notes. Bangor Business School.
  • Feyerabend, P. ( 1996 ). Against approach: Outline of your anarchistic theory of expérience. San Francisco, CALIFORNIA: Analytic Mindset Club of San Francisco
  • Celebridad, E. Farrenheit. and The french language, A. L. ( 2004 ). The CAPM: Theory and Facts. On line: hypertext transfer process: //www.econ.sdu.edu.cn/jrtzx/uploadfile/pdf/Assetpricing/04.pdf
  • Gaffikin, M. ( 2008 ). Accounting theory: Research, code and accounting pattern. Gallic Forest, Sydney: Pearson Education.
  • Hayek, Farreneheit. A. ( 1979 ). Unemployment and pecuniary plan. San Francisco: Cato Institute.
  • Hayek, F. A. ( 1944 ). The route to serfdom. London: George Routledge
  • Hofstadter, D. ( 1979 ). G? del, Esther, Bach: An timeless aureate plait. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
  • Kuhn, T. ( mil novecentos e noventa e seis ). The development of scientific revolutions. Chi town: University of Chicago Press.
  • Mouck, To. ( 1992 ). The rhetoric of scientific self-control and the unsupported claims of rebellion in the story of confident accounting theory. Accounting Auditing, and Responsibility, 5 ( 4 ): 35-56.
  • Popper, K. ( 2002a ). Unended search. An realistic life. Greater london: Routledge.
  • Popper, K. ( 2002b ). Speculations and defenses. London: Routledge.
  • Watts, R. D. And Zimmerman, J. D. ( 1978 ). To a positive theory of the getting of accounting criterions. Accounting Review, 53: 112-132.

Related essay

Category: Accounting essays,
Words: 2473

Views: 169