IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/aaajpp/aaaj-12-2019-4291.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

In defence of critical realism: a reply to Baxter and Chua and Andrew and Baker

Author

Listed:
  • Sven Modell

Abstract

Purpose - This is a reply to the commentaries by Baxter and Chua (2020) and Andrew and Baker (2020) on a paper previously published in this journal. Design/methodology/approach - This is a conceptual discussion that further clarifies the differences between critical realism (CR), actor–network theory (ANT) and traditional Marxist thought as a basis for critical accounting research. Findings - The relative merits of CR as a basis for critical accounting research are further elucidated in the light of the criticisms raised in the commentaries. In particular, the discussion of its role as a counterweight to the legacy of empiricism that hampers the possibilities of advancing radical social critique and emancipation is further developed. Research limitations/implications - The paper clarifies what CR can and cannot do for the critical accounting project and how it may be further developed as a vehicle for emancipation. Originality/value - The paper extends the debate about what critical accounting research is and could be.

Suggested Citation

  • Sven Modell, 2020. "In defence of critical realism: a reply to Baxter and Chua and Andrew and Baker," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 33(3), pages 666-674, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-12-2019-4291
    DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-12-2019-4291
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-12-2019-4291/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-12-2019-4291/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/AAAJ-12-2019-4291?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-12-2019-4291. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.