دانلود مقاله روش شناسی Q برای انجام مطالعه در حسابداری
Abstract
Keywords
Introduction
Framing this Q study within critical dialogic accounting
Methodology and methods
Factor identification and articulation
Exploring the political frontiers between divergent perspectives
Discussion and concluding comments
Declaration of Competing Interest
Acknowledgements
Appendix A - Q set (listed by core statement number)
Appendix B – Crib sheet for each Factor interpretation
Appendix C – Example PqR
Appendix D – Individual participant factor loadings
Appendix E – Reflection questionnaire (RQ1)
Appendix F – Post-sort interview guide
References
ABSTRACT
Critical accounting scholars have long lamented the hegemony of a business case rationale in accounting and its impact on the representation of interests other than those of shareholders. However, relatively little prior research has considered the perspectives of the accountant, and what little there is raises concerns about their capacity to engage with ideological diversity and complexity. Q methodology (QM) is a research method that can help critical researchers explore individuals’ perspectives around politically contentious issues by identifying a plurality of perspectives, as well as surfacing the political frontiers between them. To demonstrate this utility, I present a Q methodological study (Q study) of accountants’ perspectives of social and environmental reporting (SER). Theoretically positioned from within critical dialogic accounting, the Q study includes 33 participants – practitioners, academics and students – from Aotearoa New Zealand. QM provides a means for identifying, articulating and analysing, in this case three divergent Factors, or shared perspectives, of SER. Further analysis demonstrates how QM can identify ‘seeds of hope’ and open ‘spaces of possibility’ that lead me to recharacterise accountants’ capacity to engage in SER.
Introduction
Research methods that utilise quantitative techniques are not often the first consideration for researchers looking to conduct a critical study in accounting. Perhaps this is residual resistance to vested interests in mainstream literature (Baker & Bettner, 1997; Tuttle & Dillard, 2007) and the colonisation of accounting research by positive accounting theory (Chabrak, 2012). As a ‘common enemy’ of the broader critical accounting project, one might argue this ‘faithful’ (Richardson, 2015) resistance is what sustains an – albeit ‘fuzzy’ (Gendron, 2018) – critical accounting project (Morales & Sponem, 2017, p.150 fn2). The reason may also be fatigue from having to justify the ‘generalisability’ of their qualitative methods against the – albeit perceived – robustness of large statistical samples (Lukka & Kasanen, 1995) and ‘rigour’ of statistical hypothesis testing (Parker, 2012, p.58). For critical researchers who seek to ‘go beyond’ the status quo (Gallhofer & Haslam, 1996), engage with and question power (Annisette & Cooper, 2017), advance a political agenda (Roslender & Dillard, 2003), or better serve pluralistic communities (Dillard & Vinnari, 2017), there might also be a fear that quantitative methods are too reductionist to engage with and analyse the underlying complexity of their research interests. In line with this special issue of Critical Perspectives on Accounting, the primary aim of this paper is to present Q methodology (QM) as a method that can help critical researchers who want to explore individuals’ perspectives around complex and politically contentious issues that are rooted in ideological differences.