پارس پروژه پرتال خدمات دانشگاهی
این مقاله ISI به زبان انگلیسی از نشریه امرالد مربوط به سال ۲۰۱۹ دارای ۲۱ صفحه ی انگلیسی با فرمت PDF می باشد در ادامه این صفحه لینک دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی و بخشی از ترجمه فارسی مقاله موجود می باشد.
کد محصول: H467
سال نشر: ۲۰۱۹
نام ناشر (پایگاه داده): امرالد
نام مجله: Pacific Accounting Review
نوع مقاله: مفهومی (Conceptual paper)
تعداد صفحه انگلیسی: ۲۱ صفحه PDF
عنوان فارسی:
مقاله انگلیسی حسابداری ۲۰۱۹ : ارزیابی تحقیقات کیفی در حسابداری مدیریت با استفاده از معیارهای “مستدل (باورپذیر)”
عنوان انگلیسی:
Evaluating qualitative research in management accounting using the criteria of “convincingness”
برای دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی بر روی دکمه ذیل کلیک نمایید
وضعیت ترجمه: این مقاله تاکنون ترجمه نشده برای سفارش ترجمه ی مقاله بر روی دکمه ذیل کلیک نمایید (کد مقاله:H467)
مقالات مرتبط با این موضوع: برای مشاهده سایر مقالات مرتبط با این موضوع (با ترجمه و بدون ترجمه) بر روی دکمه ذیل کلیک نمایید
چکیده فارسی:
Abstract:
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to extend the knowledge claim of management accounting research using qualitative research methods, in particular, the interpretive case study, and its evaluation using “convincingness” criteria demonstrating the textual authenticity, plausibility and criticality of case study findings.
Design/methodology/approach: Qualitative research in the management accounting field considers both context and function (Burchell et al., 1980). This study sets out the rationale for adopting qualitative methodologies such as interpretive case studies in which rich, contextual and detailed data were collected and analyzed (Miles and Huberman, 1994; Mason, 2002). Methodological issues related to research design, analysis and evaluation are discussed by drawing on frameworks of social science research design. The paper sets out the procedures of an interpretive case study essential to ensuring the procedural validity of research which can be evaluated more accurately using the criteria of “convincingness” rather than positivist measures of the reliability, validity of data and the generalization of results. Textual authenticity, plausibility and critical interpretation, and how these hallmarks of “convincingness” can reflect the procedural validity of accounting research are described.
Findings: Qualitative research strategies such as the interpretive case study, which consider the complex settings of accounting change and practice, are found to offer deep understandings and convincing explanations of accounting change. Affirming that accounting is firmly established as a social science, the paper finds that the authenticity, plausibility and criticality of research in this field.
Research limitations/implications: The relevance of qualitative research to contemporary accounting research is considered as an effective method to explicate theory and inform practice, which suggests that new measures to evaluate related research are required to develop the potential of selected qualitative research methodologies in accounting domains.
Originality/value: Qualitative research in management accounting focuses on the interpretation of meanings found in people and organizations that are subject to the influence of contextual variables. Human attributes underpin accounting conventions and change resulting from continuous technological and regulatory advances. This paper’s comprehensive account of interpretive case study research emphasizes the significance of evaluative criteria that relate, beyond reliability, to the richness of the text. This, thus, encourages and supports new and emerging researchers to seek qualitatively coherent and critical interpretations in management accounting research.
Keywords: Qualitative research, Accounting research, “Convincingness” criteria, Finance research, Interpretive paradigm
Introduction
Qualitative research methods are being used increasingly to inquire into management accounting not only as an adjunct to quantitative methods but also as research approaches in their own right (Parker, 2003). Qualitative research methods can provide a clear understanding of how meanings and rules in accounting practice are socially generated and sustained (Hopwood, 1983; Kaplan, 1983; Kaplan, 1984; Hopper and Powell, 1985; Kaplan, 1986; Scapens, 1990; Humphrey and Scapens, 1996; Ryan et al., 2002; Navarro Galera and Rodríguez Bolívar, 2007; Tikk and Almann, 2011).
Management accounting scholars have found that qualitative methods, particularly interpretive case studies, can yield rich more explanation of the social world based on the evidence of human experience and the meanings attached to actions in actors’ language. Johnson and Christensen (2007) point out that the appropriate sites of business research and where theories relating to the complexities of change and its longer-term implications can be developed, are the organizations and institutions where business takes place. The interpretive case study approach, therefore, enables researchers to make sense of the evolution of accounting processes and its languages, as social practices with reference to surrounding institutions and underpinning routines (Nahapiet, 1988) on the basis of direct knowledge.
However, how qualitative interpretive research should be evaluated is a contested topic as conceptions of interpretive research continue to evolve. This is by “Considerable controversy surrounds the issues of evidence, criteria, quality, and utility” (Denzin and Lincoln, 2012, p. 21) at the broadest level of social science research. In the field of management accounting, the potential for the development of theory and leading to practice through qualitative research is stymied by a reprise of quantitatively empirical conventions. This is indicative of a retreat into “value-free objectivist science” (Carey, 1989, p. 104) characterized by technical rationalities in reaction to poststructuralist assertions of multitudinous, layered truths. Because such resistance in predominantly positivist academic research environments to qualitative inquiries that rely on their authority on the textual authority of description and explanation, potentially significant avenues of inquiry pertinent to business, government and society may be neglected.
| مقالات مرتبط با این موضوع |