Abstract
This paper investigates the lack of interpretive and critical research in mainstream academic accounting journals, particularly those published in the United States, and proposes some reasons for this. The terminterpretiveresearch reflects a methodological perspective. In a general sense, interpretive research attempts to describe, understand and interpret the meanings that human actors apply to the symbols and the structures of the settings in which they find themselves.Criticalresearch can also be interpretive, but critical research adopts a particular point of view regarding the research question, whereas interpretive research purports to take a ‘neutral’ stance. Since it is doubtful whether any researcher can adopt a truly neutral stance, we argue that an honest critical perspective is preferable to the dishonest mainstream perspectives and the sometimes less than forthright interpretive is preferable to the dishonest mainstream perspectives. Additionally, we argue that the type of research prevalent in mainstream accounting journals, which is characterized by a positivist methodological perspective and an emphasis on quantitative methods, is incapable of addressing accounting’s complex social ramifications. We cite various examples of interpretive and critical research studies which have looked at accounting’s role in shaping ideologies, forming political hierarchies, preserving organizational structures and masking conflicts. With few exceptions none of these citations are from mainstream accounting journals. Disturbingly, we find these journals to be virtually devoid of interpretive and critical research studies. In order to explain why this is the case, we present a framework in which accounting’s research domain is viewed as a dynamic, multidimensional, social model. Our analysis reveals the existence of social conflict at the meso-level of accounting research which excludes interpretive and critical studies from appearing in the mainstream journals. Accounting’s capacity to create and control social reality translates into empowerment for those who use it. Such power resides in organizations and institutions, where it is used to instill values, sustain legitimizing myths, mask conflict and promote self-perpetuating social orders. Throughout society, the influence of accounting permeates fundamental issues concerning wealth distribution, social justice, political ideology and environmental degradation. Contrary to public perception, accounting is not a static reflection of economic reality, but rather is a highly partisan activity. Accounting′s essence can be best understood through its impact on individuals, organizations and societies. Hence, it is important that accounting research make increasing use of interpretive and critical perspectives.