IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/qrampp/v13y2016i1p90-91.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A response to Stone and Parker

Author

Listed:
  • Brian A. Rutherford

Abstract

Purpose - To respond to the comment by Stone and Parker on my paper “The struggle to fabricate accounting narrative obfuscation: An actor-network-theoretic analysis of a failing project”. Design/methodology/approach - The paper responds to issues highlighted by Stone and Parker. Findings - This response argues that there is at least one alternative to the augmentation of Flesch: that we bring our skills and experience as accountants directly to bear on narratives, to analyse and report on how accessible and informative they are – and even to what extent they obfuscate – in ways that will, at least according to some definitions, be subjective but perhaps no more subjective than asserting that some simple statistic represents a reliable proxy for a complex notion such as accessibility. Originality/value - This comment adds to the necessary debate about how we should tackle research on accounting narratives.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian A. Rutherford, 2016. "A response to Stone and Parker," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 13(1), pages 90-91, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:eme:qrampp:v:13:y:2016:i:1:p:90-91
    DOI: 10.1108/QRAM-01-2016-0007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/QRAM-01-2016-0007/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/QRAM-01-2016-0007/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/QRAM-01-2016-0007?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:qrampp:v:13:y:2016:i:1:p:90-91. 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.