Filetype PDF | Posted on 20 Aug 2022 | 4 years ago
Authentication
digital resources
263x Filetype PDF File size 0.30 MB Source: www.atlantis-press.com
Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 173
Proceedings of the 7th Regional Accounting Conference (KRA 2020)
Research Paradigm on Grounded Theory Method for
Accounting Research: Filtering All Sensory Input
Satia Nur Maharani
State University of Malang
*Corresponding author Email: satia.nur.fe@um.ac.id
ABSTRACT
The basic beliefs defining the research paradigm can be viewed from three fundamental dimensions,
ontology, epistemology, and methodology. Ontology and epistemology pay an attention to the influence
of a person's perspective on reality. Ontology is a claim and assumption about the essence of reality,
what seems real as reality, what community constructs reality and how the community interacts. This
article is a literature review related to grounded research paradigms in the field of accounting studies.
The results of the study reflect that the research approach in accounting is not limited to quantitative
measures but also can be approached through a grounded research approach.
Grounded theory cannot be separated from the philosophy of science. In the course of undergoing
evolution and development into a method, often the main exponents experience conflicts or differing
points of view on a certain aspect. This happened in the early originators of grounded theory, Barney
Glaser and Anselm Strauss, so that the term Straussian and Glaserian grounded theory emerged. The
difference between the two exponents of grounded theory lies in the data analysis process, in particular
the procedures used. Coding in grounded theory is a process of analyzing data involving researchers as
actors in exploration, intervention and conceptualization procedures (Walker, 2011). This article
presents a literature review on how grounded theory can be an alternative methodology in accounting
studies.
Key words: grounded theory, paradigm, critical realism.
1. INTRODUCTION line with the adage which states that
accounting is an ever-changing discipline,
The failure of science is reflected from the which will change over time. The
inability of science in providing an insight evidence of this change appears in a
of reality. Meanwhile, one of the basic paradigm shift over the use of accounting
objectives of science itself is to provide which being originally understood as a
directions for what should be done. tool for reporting historical financial
Science is not only limited to explaining transactions, then developed at the level as
phenomena without providing answers to a science that has scientific constructs that
what the phenomena should be, but also a have the ability to explain, predict (to
human medium to achieve life goals and predict) and interpret (to interpret) a
even change the nature of life itself complex economic phenomenon.
(Khuza`i, 2007). Thus, science cannot
evade value due to the fact that science A scientist in producing science has a
cannot stand independently. social responsibility. The resulting
knowledge is not only limited to
The developed accounting practices today individual scientific activities, but also
indicates the development in accounting providing a beneficial to the society. This
science itself. Accounting has several article is a review literature to enrich the
scientific aspects which can change the study of scientific paradigms in
order and form in social reality. This is in accounting.
Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Atlantis Press B.V.
This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license -http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. 343
Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 173
1.1 Paradigm in the Search Context term was first used by Thomas Kuhn to
denote a conceptual framework providing
a model for studying problems and finding
Kuhn (1970), in his book “The Structure solutions. Kuhn defined a paradigm as the
of Scientific Revolutions”, wrote that the integration of methodology with problems
concept of paradigm was developed in and variables. Paradigm refers to a
order to differentiate between the social research culture in the form of a set of
and natural sciences. Thomas Kuhn put beliefs, values and assumptions used by
the paradigm in the context of the "search" the scientific community in carrying out
for understanding in conditions and research (Kuhn, 1977). Paradigm implies
situations of disagreement in social a pattern, structure, values and a
science research with regard to theory, framework or system of scientific ideas.
concepts and methodology. Therefore, Guba & Lincoln (2009) defined paradigm
there is no correct paradigm in social as a set of basic beliefs about the nature of
science, due to the fact that paradigmatic the world and its relationship with all the
phase is always developed. components surrounding it.
Science is bound by the dimensions of The basic beliefs which define the
space and time, so that paradigmatic research paradigm can be viewed from the
revolutions are a consequence of the open- three fundamental dimensions, ontology,
ended nature inherent in science. The epistemology and methodology. Ontology
paradigmatic revolution is an expectation and epistemology pay an attention to the
to get the answers from layers of influence of a person's perspective on
problems that the old paradigm has not reality. Ontology is a claim and
been opened it yet. When a scientists are assumption about the nature of reality,
capable to penetrate a new world with what seems real as reality, what
their paradigm, they will have a different community that constructs reality and
view of their research activities. This was how the community interacts.
stated by Kuhn (1970, p. 111) as follows:
Blakie (2000) described an ontology as
“Led by a new paradigm, scientists "the study of existence", which explains a
adopt new instruments and having claim on the nature of reality specifically
a new sight. Even more important, whether it is object (really exists) or
scientists discover an innovation subject (created by mind). The ontology
when looking to familiar aspect of the qualitative approach is
instruments in places they have reality which being understood as a
looked before. It seems as if the subject, based on human perceptions and
professional community had been experiences which always change in
suddenly transported to another context and time. Meanwhile, the
planet where familiar objects are ontology aspect of the quantitative
seen in a different light and joined approach is the social world existing as a
by unfamiliar ones as well. separate or objective reality.
Nevertheless, the changes of
paradigm caused the scientists to Epistemology is the science of methods or
see differently their involvement in patterns to gain knowledge of reality, how
the world of research.” that reality exists, how to explore reality
and the criteria that must be met in order
Castellacci (2006) analogized paradigm to be positioned as a science. Chia (2002)
described epistemology as how to know
as a set of rules for filtering noise and and whether it is possible to know (how
focusing on finding, capturing and and what it is possible to know) which is
listening to the voices of friends. When we reflected by a reliable and verifiable
jostle on a city bus with a friend, then we method.
have to separate the voices of other
passengers mixed up with the city bus Therefore, epistemology is related to how
engine through a sensory process to find, researchers know reality and how reality
capture and focus on our friend's voice. should be represented or described. In
other words, epistemology is the nature of
The term paradigm comes from the Greek the relationship between researchers and
word paradigm which means pattern. This something that can be known (reality).
344
Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 173
This relationship according to Denzim of the same understanding, namely how to
and Lincoln (2009) is limited by its recognize reality. However, epistemology
ontological aspects. That is, if it is lies in understanding its philosophy while
assumed that reality is real, the attitude methodology involves practical
taken by the one who knows (the implementation. Methodology refers to
researcher) is separation from reality so procedures to guide the research process
that it is objective. Thus, the reality is including research design. The focus of
characterized by value free and becomes the methodology is on how problems can
the real reality. Conversely, if it is be better studied and understood through
assumed that reality is subjective, that certain means or methods. Silverman
reality is the result of social construction. (2005) suggested that methodologies can
The attitude the researcher takes is to be broadly and schematically defined
make a direct observation into reality and (quantitative and qualitative
interpret it. methodologies) or narrow (grounded
theory, case studies, ethnography).
Methodology is closely related to
epistemology where both are a reflection
social reality. This study pays attention to
1.2 Research Paradigm: Pospositivism the activities of theory falsification, theory
improvement or refinement of previous
theories. Falsification notices from the
Grix (2004) emphasized the importance of point of view of error by assuming that a
understanding philosophical foundation theory does not have perfect or absolute
before conducting a research. This is due truth. Every effort is made to prove this
to the large influence on how people view error and then correct or refine the theory.
social reality (paradigm) on their method Falsification is a characteristic of
or way of conducting research to reveal pospositivism and critical realism as its
ontology (Crotty, 1997).
1.3 Positivism Towards Pospositivism (physical) in which soul and matter can be
studied without referring to each other.
The roots of the positivism paradigm are Theology is left to theologians while
matter is the subject of science. This
found in the Western enlightenment concept has influenced various scientific
project in the 16th century. Although the investigations for three centuries since its
term positivism was discovered in the introduction.
16th century through the writings of
Francis Bacon, the French scientist At the end of the 19th century, the anti-
Auguste Comte being credited with positivism movement was born to oppose
popularizing the term through Société the domination of positvism. Wilhelm
Positiviste, which founded by him in Dilthey (1833-1911), Heinrich Ricky
1848. The philosophy of positivism based (1863-1936) and Max Weber (1864-
on knowledge and empirically verified 1920), argued the failure of positivism to
phenomena which claims that the appreciate fundamental experiences in the
attainment of the goal of truth is life journey of reality, failure to capture
conducted through a diversification physical and mental regularities and to
pattern that can be predicted with ignore important experiences reflecting
certainty. characteristics of human phenomena.
Positivism assumes that truth is a priori, The anti-positivism movement began to
which can be found through methodology doubt their possibility of finding an
and strict and careful observation absolute truth. This is exemplified by
repeatedly. Positivism views theology and Werner Heisenberg (1901-1976), one of
metaphysics as out of date or imperfect the founders of quantum mechanics
knowledge models. The scientist who through the "uncertainty principle" which
supports this paradigm is Rene Decartes states that it is impossible to determine the
(1596-1650), by introducing the concept position (x) and momentum (p) of a
of cartesian dualism, namely the subatomic particle (electron) accurately
separation of theology (including (in certain). The position and the velocity
metaphysics and soul) from matter cannot be determined simultaneously,
345
Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research, volume 173
because the more accurately the velocity dimensions compared to natural sciences.
is determined, the less accurate the Therefore, the correctness of a paradigm
position will be. The uncertain nature of depends on the objectives and research
the atom, the secrets within the infinite findings.
atom, cannot be reached by the means of
human measurement and observation. The Pos-positivism paradigm was born in
Heisenberg (1949, p. 11) explained this as the 1960s, to correct the weaknesses of
follows: positivism which only relies on direct
observation and separated from the object
“The uncertainty principle refers to under study. Patton (1990, p. 92) asserted
the degree of indeterminacy in the this as follows:
possible present knowledge of the
simultaneous values of various “Post-positivism takes into
quantities with which the quantum account the criticisms and
theory deals; it does not restrict, for weakness from the rigidity of
example, the exactness of a positivism. Nowadays, it informs
position measurement or just a many contemporary social science
velocity of measurement. Thus, the researches, including reality-
velocity of a free electron is oriented qualitative inquiry…”
precisely known, while the
position is completely unknown. According to Morgan (2007),
At the instant of time when the Pospositivism is a basic approach to
position is determined, that is, at human knowledge declining an opinion
the instant when the photon is that knowledge is built on absolute truth.
scattered by the electron, the This paradigm accepts fallibilism, namely
electron undergoes a discontinuous the doctrine which states that an absolute
change in momentum. This change knowledge is impossible. On the other
is getting bigger, the smaller the hand, pospositivism believes that there is
wavelength of the light applied, the a real reason guiding the changing and
more precise the determination of developing dynamics. It is unsimilar as
the position. At the instant at which positivism which pays full attention to
the position of the electron is verification and certainty, positivism
known, its momentum therefore accepts that not all statements can be fully
can be known only up to verified and even places more emphasis
magnitudes which correspond to on falsification.
that discontinuous change; thus,
the more precisely the position is Denzim and Lincoln (2009) argued that
determined, the less precisely the pospositivism places reality as a fact that
momentum is known, and can be imperfectly known. Reality is in
conversely.” the frame of probability not certainty as in
positivism. The assumption of the
pospositivism ontology is critical realism
Crotty (1998) responded to the where there is an opportunity to grasp the
uncertainty principle above as an truth of reality but it is impossible to grasp
epistemological notion, that deep the truth perfectly. This is because reality
observation finds differences in particle is substantially difficult to control
behavior. (Denzim and Lincoln, 2009). Therefore,
studying science must be carried out
Furthermore, Thomas Kuhn's publication, continuously to get valid results which
entitled The Structure of Scientific almost reaches a perfect truth.
Revolution, is a "big slap" for positivism. Epistemologically, this school states that
The publication of Kuhn (1970) birth to a it is impossible to find the truth if the
history and sociological understanding of observers are not involved in the research
science. Over the years, scientists’ works or back of screen. Therefore, an
always restricted by a paradigm which interactive relationship must be built
emphasize an objectivity and a paradigm between the observer and the object being
which upholds free-value in its scientific observed.
discovery. Meanwhile, social reality is
formed by humans with complex Guba and Lincoln (2009) mentioned the
epistemological assumptions in
346
no reviews yet
Please Login to review.
