Critique Of Half A Defense Of Positive Accounting Research Essay.

Question:

Discuss about the Multicomponent Positive Psychology Intervention.

The topic underlying this deliberation relates to the deficiencies manifested in practice that has failed the powerful vast positivist research program. The main aim of this analysis is to review critically the article “Half a Defense of Positive Accounting Research” inscribed by Paul V Dunmore to showcase the impact of insufficiencies in practice in achieving the potential of the powerful wide-ranging positive accounting theory research program. The principal argument in this critique is that with adequate practice in positive accounting theory research program, the potential influential broad positivist research program will be unattainable (Christie 2007).

It is contended that the present practice in positive in accounting appears infinitely unqualified of appreciating the scientific objectives. It is additionally argued that notwithstanding the inconsistencies in accounting practice, “normal’ science as described by Kuhn avails an absolution and a background affixed on Kuhnian crisis along with insurgency as it is potential to unshackle positive accounting to accomplish its full probable. The critique takes the following structure to expansively capture the foremost argument declared overhead (Dillard and Vinnari 2017).

The 1^st subsection stretches the transitory summary of the article by focusing primarily on the foremost argument of this paper. This section will encompass of the article’s aim, overal findings and theoretical argument along with contribution. The 2^nd subsection digs bottomless into research question. This subcategory will principally ascertain the research question or hypothesis offered in the article. It will further discuss hypothesis or the research question’s value as acknowledged and explain whether besides how such a hypothesis or research question run from the review of literature (Dunmore 2011).

The 3^rd sub-section specifies the article’s theoretical framework whereby the acknowledgment and deliberation of such a framework is characterized or the theoretical substance of the article which informed the research’s aspect. The 4^th subsection lengthily deliberates the article’s limitation and significance. This section uses literature to discuss the inadequacies of the theory as well as the methodological approach adopted. It upholds whether the scholar has appreciated such faintness and whether the researcher has drawn deductions from the studies that are admissible by the methodological approach employed. This subsection also demonstrate whether the recognized deficits have affected both article’s substance along with contribution in regards to the accounting discipline hinged on the author’s findings established against the method of study. The final sub-section provides a brief supposition as well as recaps the crucial points and deducting implication for critique.

The underlying article under this critique is the Paul V Dunmore’s “Half a Defense of Positive Accounting Research”. It essentially circumvents about the positive accounting theory research program as devised by Zimmerman and Watts. The claim was staked by the duo to the Positive Accounting Theory (PAT) for their given theory. The scholar pursued the scrutiny of the positive methodology to the accounting research.

Paul observed positive accounting research as constituent of the wider intellectual project of scientific research that is poised to understand as well as comprehend the cause-effect correlation in the essential world of research. Paul has considered positive accounting in the broader viewpoint of study program which aims at developing causal clarification of the human behavior within accounting context (Roth, Suldo and Ferron 2017).

Research question and hypothesis

Paul has further performed an analysis of epistemology alongside ontology of positivist accounting program.  Numerous tests encompassing logic of statistical hypothesis whereas superficially equivalent to fabrication standard of Popper have further been recognized as inferior. Paul has further recognized that notwithstanding the comprehensive positivist research program being potentially powerful, the shortages in practice obstructs the apprehension of its jam-packed potential.

The universal encounters impeding the program have as well been documented in the article plus theoretical models’ casual construction that needs testing as well as undue dependency on hypothesis testing the logic. Lack of interest in parameters’ numerical values and insufficient imitation to merit confidence in finding acceptance have as well been recognized as shared impediments.  The use of theories as lenses for analyzing qualitative data rather than as clarifications for tests is an additional shared contest the program faces. Paul has also taken into account illustrations from pertinent and respectable articles for arguments’ justification.

Paul also reviewed the wider knowledgeable project together with the ontological and epistemological axioms to understand the both the significance as well as inconsistencies of positive accounting study. The review exposed serious absences in the way that positive accounting study is accomplished that obstructs it from enacting meaningful contribution to the wide-ranging project (Kim et al. 2017).

Paul held that as presently being practiced in accounting, positive research stays massively inept to attaining the scientific objectives. Nonetheless, Paul remains positive that Kuhn’s illumination of the “normal” science professionally fits the positive accounting research.  The predictions of Kuhn’s narration are clarified in transitory on the basis of Kuhnian crisis and revolution. It is believed that such a crunch and insurgency is latent to unshackle the positive accounting thus attaining its full potential.

Paul has employed numerous hypotheses together with research questions that and explained that he is never declaring their truth, but rather just exploratory for an “enthusiastic postponement of incredulity” to permit their corresponding discussion. Four hypotheses have been provided by Paul and developed impartially uncertainly, mindful that for numerous of human being, they could have remained imagined disgraceful and immoral and that apparently an inordinate percentage of humanity could endure to discern the same. The list of working hypotheses imagined in a watercourse of intelligent investigation by Paul is given below:

• A world that is self-sufficient of imagination of people exist that was never constituted by individuals and its events are not subject to the aspirations of people control
• It is practicable for normal folks to obtain fairly dependable information concerning the events of the world via cautious observation. This, however, does not imply that persons will never be mistaken when observing, but rather such annotations are not ever exclusively unrelated to such a world
• The intellectual enquiry devotes to use observations to achieve an understanding of this world, and exactly of causation. This implies that folks seek out mental models that precisely map the process of causal that happen in such a world
• The events of this world have causes that are independently component of the world which imply that neither fully random nor the results of the interventions from outside world
• How does positive accounting research applied currently in accounting practice?
• To what extent does the deficits in the positive accounting research implementation resulted in the ineffectiveness of PAT research program than predicted?

The theoretical framework assumed by Paul evolves from a positivist viewpoint of a dissatisfied theoretical physicist whose accounting research vestiges positivist emphasizing either model testing or building (Watts and Zimmerman 2010). The disapprovals of the author, consequently, attached the standpoint of a person thinking that the research project is noteworthy, but disheartened by the incompetent and unproductive versions that are currently experienced in accounting. Paul utilizes this perception to impulse both editors along with referees to approve such actions to prod the present systems in the direction of the liberating positive accounting research to accomplish its jam-packed potential (Faff et al. 2017).

Paul article’s theoretical substance, therefore, builds on the acknowledgment from the literature review on auditing that serious shortages exist in the contemporary practice in accounting research thereby hampering PAT research program from making a substance influence to the wider project. This is meant to establishing positive accounting research as a well-established social system to donate to the project of scientific research (Fleischman et al. 2017).  

Theoretical framework

It is anchored on the realization that adopting findings of Kuhn (1970) study would be despondent to influence elites to cuddle a more than ever operative paradigm. The scholar additionally recognizes an amnesty offered by the data that emerged from Fogarty and Markarian (2007) which hinted at elites’ comparative stance being diminishing. Consequently, the Paul anticipated forthcoming future crisis and the opportunity for the assumption of a more than ever beneficial paradigm.

Paul successively based his argument on providing proposals for actions by editors as well as referees to prod the present systems in the direction of liberating PAT research to hit its full potential. Paul is informed by the recognition that it is important to appreciate the world’s Modus Operandi and afterwards regarded it as an undesirability that the related research watercourse is unproductive and unsuccessful, and, hence he has provided definite proposals for upgrading.

The auditing literature’s systematic review via the qualitative method assumed in this study is attributable to certain restrictions/shortcomings. One of these restrictions is that a possibility of carrying forward certain mistakes and errors made by aforementioned scholars into the present study is high. Further, the method confines the production of new findings because there is no room to collect the primary data when secondary data is used which does not capture the vicissitudes effectively (Dunmore 2011).

Another limitation in the theory assumed in this study is the lack of theoretical models that are tremendously specified and, therefore, it is vulnerable to permit thorough testing. Paul has documented these boundaries by signifying the need for healthier theoretical models. This suggestion arises from the backdrop of the emerging sumptuous models from analytical research that are never framed to be testable due to their unsatisfactory development alongside concentration on tractability hinged on concepts that  are never meritoriously well-defined theoretically to allow operationalization (Watts and Zimmerman 2012).

Paul has further recognized the absenteeism of better measurements to allow demanding testing of theoretical models because of failed concepts operationalization. Another limitation admitted is the nonexistence of homogenous reliable linear relationship-oriented manner to be espoused in measuring each study. The recurrent parameters’ re-invention of measurement as well as re-estimation with individual sample per study has also been recognized as the drawback to positive research from achieving its bursting potential (Franco and Roach 2017).

Paul has successfully drawn theoretical inferences from the research which are justifiable methodologically. This is because the precincts have been acknowledged from the systematic review of the previous auditing literature that have in turn molded the basis for proposing enhancements to allow positive research to meet its chockfull potential. For instance, the recommended need for ever-changing focus away from the testing hypotheses towards estimating parameters afterwards being informed by the attentiveness of testing hypothesis from the previous reviewed studies (Pandey et al. 2017).

The precincts have considerably unfavorably influenced the significance of the study whereas they have concomitantly absolutely exaggerated the article’s contribution to the discipline (Williams 2009). This is due to the ineptitude in methodology as well as theories in the article never gave room for presenting reliable aftermaths, but the discipline is improved going forward via proposing recommendation that need to inform succeeding studies to empower positive research to meet its packed potential (Bertomeu, Darrough and Xue 2017).

Conclusion

Paul has unearthed that models which are tremendously specified and, hence, exceptionally defenseless, besides being undertaken extremely as thorough testing subjects are required. Paul has further accredited that unacceptable progress is ongoing in positive accounting research as a straight repercussion of using ad hoc quantitative models which are weakened to mere statements of the expected sign of a linking between two variables (Volovski et al. 2017). There is a need for effective measurement to enhance the testing of theoretical models rigorously by carefully operationalizing the concepts (Baiman 2010). Paul calls for augmented courtesy towards choosing accurate practical form.  The critique’s implications, therefore, is that positive research’s limitations have been recognized and counteractive schemes for upgrading suggested. Adopting these improvements will make positive research achieve its jam-packed potential.

References

Baiman, S., 2010. Agency research in managerial accounting: A second look. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 15(4), pp.341-371.

Bertomeu, J., Darrough, M. and Xue, W., 2017. Optimal conservatism with earnings manipulation. Contemporary Accounting Research, 34(1), pp.252-284.

Christie, A.A., 2007. On cross-sectional analysis in accounting research. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 9(3), pp.231-258.

Dillard, J. and Vinnari, E., 2017. A case study of critique: Critical perspectives on critical accounting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 43, pp.88-109.

Dunmore, P.V., 2011. Half a Defence of Positive Accounting Research. Available at SSRN 1955419.

Dunmore, P.V., 2011. Half a Defence of Positive Accounting Research.

Faff, R.W., Carrick, R., Chen, A., Escobar, M., Khong, B.X.M., Nguyen, B.H. and Tunny, W., 2017. Fantasy Pitching III: UQ Summer Research Scholars–the Role of'Money'in the 21st Century.

Fleischman, G.M., Stephenson, T., Walker, K.B. and Cook, K.A., 2017. Factors that Influence Accounting Faculty Career Satisfaction: Comparisons by Program Prestige and Tenure Status. Accounting Horizons.

Franco, A. and Roach, S.S., 2017. Factors That Determine Accounting Anxiety Among Users of English as a Second Language Within an International MBA Program. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 16(1).

Kim, H.J., Min, A., Im, S.A., Jang, H., Lee, K.H., Lau, A., Lee, M., Kim, S., Yang, Y., Kim, J. and Kim, T.Y., 2017. Anti?tumor activity of the ATR inhibitor AZD6738 in HER2 positive breast cancer cells. International Journal of Cancer, 140(1), pp.109-119.

Pandey, S.K., Pandey, S., Breslin, R.A. and Broadus, E.D., 2017. Public Service Motivation Research Program: Key Challenges and Future Prospects.

Roth, R.A., Suldo, S.M. and Ferron, J.M., 2017. Improving Middle School Students' Subjective Well-Being: Efficacy of a Multicomponent Positive Psychology Intervention Targeting Small Groups of Youth. School Psychology Review.

Volovski, M., Murillo-Hoyos, J., Saeed, T.U. and Labi, S., 2017. Estimation of Routine Maintenance Expenditures for Highway Pavement Segments: Accounting for Heterogeneity Using Random-Effects Models. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems, p.04017006.

Watts, R.L. and Zimmerman, J.L., 2010. Positive accounting theory: a ten year perspective. Accounting review, pp.131-156.

Watts, R.L. and Zimmerman, J.L., 2012. Positive accounting theory.

Williams, P.F., 2009. The logic of positive accounting research. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 14(5), pp.455-468.