IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ami/journl/v20y2021i4p607-645.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Properly Identified Imaginary Needs, An Inaccurately Proposed Methodology: The Case of Rochester School of Accountancy’s Positive Accounting Methodology

Author

Listed:
  • Khalid Al-Adeem

    (Faculty of accounting at King Saud University, Saudi Arabia)

Abstract

Research Question - Whether accounting research has been in a better status after the domination of Rochester School of Accountancy’s Positive Accounting Methodology. Motivation - This study revisits the debate of the validity of Rochester school of accountancy's positive methodology. Rochester school of accountancy's positive accounting research has properly identified the assumed imaginary need of the US market. While positive accounting methodology may not be scientific under various accounts for science, it has contributed to accounting methodologically. Idea - Restricting financial accounting on issues related to decision-usefulness and perceiving corporate reporting as a product of accounting choices from an agency theory perspective constrains other dimensions of reality. Any restrictions to definitions of the role of accounting and its function (Glauter & Underdowen, 1974) blocks profoundly deep-rooted in contextual factors such as a country's social, political, and economic environment that all make up accounting which supposedly needs to be considered (Hellmann et al., 2010) in properly theorizing comprehensively practiced accounting. Data - Extensive writings have that documented internationally throughout time have been looked over. Tools - An analytical and critical examination has been conducted upon internationally accounting literature in a wide-ranging manner to provide an evaluation regarding Rochester school of accountancy's positive accounting research. Findings - The positive accounting methodology of the Rochester school of accountancy has been criticized by several accounting researchers for decades and even deem it disappointment and probably shame. Yet, Watts and Zimmerman declared themselves prime candidates. Its prevalence is the rhetoric of scientific inquiry. A measure of the failure of the so-called positive accounting methodology has achieved lays in its inability to become universal because differences in institutional environments persevere in the world. Contribution - Revisiting the debate of the validity of Rochester school of accountancy's positive methodology potentially contributes to our knowledge in assessing its legitimate prevalence in academic accounting research. New accounting researchers and scholars need to be aware of the predominant theoretical structure that governs the empirical financial paradigm and its limitation. This is especially significant to accounting researcher who has been intellectually trained under the positivistic tradition of economics.

Suggested Citation

  • Khalid Al-Adeem, 2021. "Properly Identified Imaginary Needs, An Inaccurately Proposed Methodology: The Case of Rochester School of Accountancy’s Positive Accounting Methodology," Journal of Accounting and Management Information Systems, Faculty of Accounting and Management Information Systems, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, vol. 20(4), pages 607-645, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:ami:journl:v:20:y:2021:i:4:p:607-645
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://online-cig.ase.ro/RePEc/ami/articles/20_4_3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Rochester School of Accountancy; Positive Accounting; Accounting Research; Research Methodology; Accounting Education; Rhetoric; Science; Theorizing; Theorization; Accounting Theory; Paradigm; Domination; Elitism; Role of Accounting;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M14 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Corporate Culture; Diversity; Social Responsibility
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting
    • M42 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Auditing
    • M48 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Government Policy and Regulation

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ami:journl:v:20:y:2021:i:4:p:607-645. 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: Cristina Tartavulea (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.