Research Article

PRAGMATIC PHILOSOPHICAL APPROACH TO WEIGHTING CORPORATE DISCLOSURE IN ACCOUNTING RESEARCH

Mohammed Lawal1*, Mohammed Mustapha Bagudo1
1 Department of Accounting, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria Kaduna State, Nigeria
* Corresponding author: lawal.mohammed.sani@gmail.com
Published: Dec, 2013
Pages: 33-52
Views: 101
Downloads: 61

Abstract

The philosophical perspective which underpins any research is fundamental to the outcome of the inquiry and the applicability of its findings. Generally, accounting research was dominated by the interpretive philosophical paradigm during the ‘golden age’ of accounting research, while contemporary accounting research has been largely dominated by positivism. Notwithstanding the popularization of the two dominant paradigms in accounting research, and particularly positivism in corporate disclosure research, many scholars have clamored for the proliferation of an alternative paradigm in accounting research. Pragmatism which is widely considered as a ‘middle-ground’ philosophical perspective between the two dominant paradigms has gained some recognition among accounting researchers but has largely remained obscured in the literature. This article tries to bring to light an alternative approach to benchmarking extent of disclosure in accounting research based on a pragmatic perspective. It prescribes an approach which requires accounting disclosure researchers to weight disclosure based on a matrix of soft or hard disclosure versus news worthy or general information to capture the relative signaling strength of each individual disclosure item. It further concludes that pragmatism can help bring new insights to accounting researchers by altering the way they perceive specific accounting issues.

Keywords

Pragmatism Corporate Disclosure Paradigm Accounting Research philosophy

References

  1. Baker, M. & Schaltegger, S. (2013). Pragmatism, Truth and Social Accounting Research. In 7th Asia Pacific interdisciplinary research in accounting conference APIRA.
  2. Bartle, J. R., and Shields, P. M. (2008). Applying Pragmatism to Public Budgeting and Financial Management. Association for Budgeting and Financial Management conference October 24, 2008 Chicago, Illinois
  3. Bryman, A. (2006). Paradigm peace and the implication for quality. International journal of Social Science Research Methodology 9, 111-126
  4. Bryman. A. (2007). Barriers to integrating qualitative and quantitative research. Journal of Mixed Method Research 1, 8-22
  5. Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis (Vol. 248). London: Heinemann.
  6. Chambers, R. J. (1966). Accounting, evaluation and economic behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall
  7. Core, J. E. (2001). A review of the empirical disclosure literature: discussion. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31(1), 441-456.
  8. Denscombe, M (2010). The good research guide, 4th Ed., Open University Press, Berkshire.
  9. Dewey, J. (1931). The development of American pragmatism, in Dewey J (1931) Philosophy and civilization. Minton, Balch & Co, New York
  10. Dousa, T. M. (2009). Classical Pragmatism and its Varieties: On a Pluriform Meta- theoretical Perspective for Knowledge Organization. Proceedings North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization Vol 2. Available athttp://dlist.sir.arizona.edu/2626
  11. Feltham, G. A., &Ohlson, J. A. (1995). Valuation and clean surplus accounting for operating and financial activities. Contemporary accounting research, 11(2), 689-731.
  12. Goldkuhl, G. (2012). Pragmatism vs interpretivism in qualitative information systems research. European Journal of Information Systems, 21(2), 135-146.
  13. Guba, E.G. and Lincoln, Y.S. (1989). Fourth Generation Evaluation, Sage Publications. Newbury Park. California.
  14. Hallebone, E. and Priest, J. (2009), Business and Management Research: Paradigms and Practices. Palgrave Macmillan. New York.
  15. Healy, P. M., & Palepu, K. G. (2001). Information asymmetry, corporate disclosure, and the capital markets: A review of the empirical disclosure literature. Journal of accounting and economics, 31(1), 405-440.
  16. Hendriksen, E.S. and Van Breda,M.F.(1992). Accounting theory.5th edition. Homewood Ill: Irwin.
  17. Holden, M. T. and Lynch, P. (2004). Choosing the Appropriate Methodology: Understanding Research Philosophy (RIKON Group).
  18. Hoque, Z., & Hopper, T. (1994). Rationality, accounting and politics: a case study of management control in a Bangladeshi jute mill. Management Accounting Research, 5(1), 5-30.
  19. Hoque, Z., & Hopper, T. (1997). Political and industrial relations turbulence, competition and budgeting in the nationalised jute mills of Bangladesh. Accounting and Business Research, 27(2), 125-143.
  20. Ijiri, Y. (1975). Theory of accounting measurement. Studies in Accounting Research. Sarasota, FL: American Accounting Association
  21. James, W. (1907). Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking. New York: Longman Green and Co.
  22. Jönsson, H. and K. Lukka (2005). Doing interventionist research in management accounting. GRI rapport 2005:6. Göteborg, Gothenburg Research Institute: 47
  23. Jönsson, S. (1999). Action research in management accounting studies. rapport nr.: GRI reports, (1999).
  24. Kabir, M. H. (2010). Positive accounting theory and science. Journal of Centrum Cathedra, 3(2), 136-149.
  25. Kothari, S. P., Li, X., & Short, J. E. (2009). The effect of disclosures by management, analysts, and business press on cost of capital, return volatility, and analyst forecasts: A study using content analysis. The Accounting Review, 84(5), 1639-1670.
  26. Littleton, A. C. (1953). Structure of accounting theory. Monograph No. 5. Sarasota, FL: American Accounting Association.
  27. Lor, Peter. "Methodology in comparative studies." International and comparative librarianship (2011): 1-21.
  28. MacNeal, K. (1970). Truth in accounting. Houston, Tx: Scholars Book Company. (Original work published1939
  29. Mayew, W. J. (2012). Disclosure Outlets and Corporate Financial Communication: A Discussion of "Managers' Use of Language Across Alternative Disclosure Outlets: Earnings Press Releases versus MD&A". Contemporary Accounting Research, 29(3), 838-844.
  30. Mickhail, G. & Graaf, A. (2000). The Kabuki of accounting philosophy. Maitre de conference, IAE, University d'Orleans, France
  31. Naser, K., Al-Khatib, K., &Karbhari, Y. (2002). Empirical evidence on the depth of corporate information disclosure in developing countries: The case of Jordan. International Journal of Commerce and Management, 12(3/4), 122-155.
  32. Olalere, T. (2011). Methodology in Accounting research: A Critique of Taxonomy. Available at SSRN 1921192.
  33. Petersen, M. A. (2004). Information: Hard and soft. working paper, Northwestern University.
  34. Penman, S. (2013). Accounting standard setting: Thoughts on developing a conceptual framework. China Journal of Accounting Studies, 1(3-4), 157-167.
  35. Petruk, O. M., Legenchuk, S. F., &Koroliuk, N. M. (2013). Development of Accounting Theory in English-Speaking Countries: On the Way to Multi-Paradigmatic Discipline. Облік і фінанси, (3), 48-56.
  36. Raddon, A. (2010). Early stage research training: Epistemology & ontology in social science research. Generic Skills Training for Research Students. Retrieved August 15, 2014, from https://www2.le.ac.uk/colleges/socsci/documents/research-training-presentations/EpistFeb10.pdf
  37. Rahman, Z. (1961). Truth: old and new, philosophy, science and other essays. Pakistan Philosophical Congress. Lahor.
  38. Belkaoui, A. R. (2004). Accounting theory. London: Thomson Learning
  39. Ryan, B., Scapens, R. W., & Theobald, M. (2002). Research method and methodology in finance and accounting.
  40. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2009). Research Methods for Business Students. Pearson Education. London
  41. Schiehll, E., Borba, J. A., & Murcia, F. D. R. (2007). Financial accounting: an epistemological research note. RevistaContabilidade&Finanças, 18(45), 83-90.
  42. Senik, R. (2009) "Understanding Accounting Research Paradigms: Towards Alternative Methodologies", Integration and Dissemination, pp.58
  43. Sunder, S. (2012). Corporate Disclosure: A Symposium. Accounting Horizons, 26 (2), 353-355.
  44. Tennis, J. T. (2008). Epistemology, theory, and methodology in knowledge organization: toward a classification, metatheory, and research framework. Knowledge organization, 35(2/3), 102-112.
  45. Tuli, F. (2011). The basis of distinction between qualitative and quantitative research in social science: reflection on ontological, epistemological and methodological perspectives. Ethiopian Journal of Education and Sciences, 6(1).
  46. Van der Schyf, D. B. (2008). The essence of a university and scholarly activity in accounting, with reference to a Department of Accounting at a South African university. Meditari Accountancy Research, 16(1), 1-26.
  47. Wahyuni, D. (2012). The research design maze: Understanding paradigms, cases, methods and methodologies. Journal of Applied Management Accounting Research, 10(1), 69-80.
  48. Watts, R. and J. L. Zimmerman (1978). "Towards a positive theory of the determination of accounting standards." The Accounting Review (January): 112-134
  49. Watts, R. L., & Zimmerman, J. L. (1986). Positive accounting theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
How to Cite

Lawal, M., & Bagudo, M. M. (2013). PRAGMATIC PHILOSOPHICAL APPROACH TO WEIGHTING CORPORATE DISCLOSURE IN ACCOUNTING RESEARCH. Nigerian Journal of Accounting Research, 9(2), 33-52.

M. Lawal, and M. M. Bagudo, "PRAGMATIC PHILOSOPHICAL APPROACH TO WEIGHTING CORPORATE DISCLOSURE IN ACCOUNTING RESEARCH," Nigerian Journal of Accounting Research, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 33-52, December 2013.

Share this article:
Facebook X / Twitter LinkedIn
Download PDF View Full Text (PDF) Back to Articles