This document discusses various approaches to constructing accounting theories, including pragmatic, syntactic, semantic, normative, and positive approaches. It also addresses differences between scientific and naturalistic perspectives. Accounting theory has evolved from a normative approach focused on deriving true income and decision usefulness to a more positive descriptive approach based on real-world experiences. Developing auditing theory mirrors this evolution and the document discusses early normative auditing theories as well as more recent positive experimental research on auditing judgments and decision making.

1. LECTURE 2
ACCOUNTING THEORY
CONSTRUCTION
ARTHIK DAVIANTI, SE. MSI. AK. CA.

2. BASIC THOUGHTS
 Theories’ assumptions
 Formulation of theories
 Approaches to explaining and
predicting

3. CLASSIFICATION OF THEORY
 Pragmatic approach – observing the
behaviour of accountants or those who use
the information provided by them.
 Syntactic approach – logical argument, based
on a set of premises.
 Semantic approach – concern with the way
theories correspond to real-world events.
 Normative approach – based on semantic
and syntactic.
 Positive approach – test hypotheses against
actual events.
 Naturalistic approach – individual cases and
do not try to generalize.

4. PRAGMATIC THEORIES
Descriptive pragmatic approach:
 based on observed behaviour of
accountants
 theory developed from how accountants
act in certain situations
 tested by observing whether accountants
do act in the way the theory suggests
 is an inductive approach
4

5. PRAGMATIC THEORIES
Criticisms of descriptive pragmatic approach:
 does not consider the quality of an
accountant’s action
 does not provide for accounting practices
to be challenged
 focuses on accountants’ behaviour not on
measuring the attributes of the firm

6. PRAGMATIC THEORIES
Psychological pragmatic approach:
 theory depends on observations of
the reactions of users to the
accountants’ outputs
 a reaction is taken as evidence that
the outputs are useful and contain
relevant information
6

7. PRAGMATIC THEORIES
Criticisms of the psychological pragmatic
approach:
 some users may react in an illogical manner
 some users might have a preconditioned
response
 some users may not react when they should
Theories are therefore tested using large
samples of people
7

8. SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC
THEORIES
Semantic inputs are the transactions
and exchanges recorded in vouchers,
journals and ledgers
• The inputs are then manipulated on
the basis of the premises and
assumptions of historical cost
accounting
8

9. SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC
THEORIES
Criticised because there is no
independent empirical verification of the
calculated outputs
The outputs may be criticised for poor
syntax inaccurate e.g. different types of
monetary measures are added together
9

10. SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC
THEORIES
The outputs may be syntactically
accurate but nevertheless be
valueless due to a lack of semantic
accuracy (a lack of correspondence
with real-world events, transactions
or values)
10

11. SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC
THEORIES
Historic cost accounting may produce
‘accurate’ outputs but which
nevertheless have little or no utility
That is, they are not useful for economic
decision making except to verify
accounting entries
11

12. NORMATIVE THEORIES
1950s and 1960s ‘golden age’
 policy recommendations
 what should be
 concentrated on deriving:
 true income (profit)
 practices that enhance decision-usefulness
 based on analytic and empirical propositions
12
Financial statements should mean what they say

13. NORMATIVE THEORIES
True income:
 a single measure for assets
 a unique and correct profit figure
Decision usefulness:
 the basic objective of accounting is to
aid the decision-making process of
certain ‘users’ of accounting reports by
providing useful accounting data
13

14. NORMATIVE THEORIES
The decision process
14
Accounting
system of
company X
Prediction
model of
user
Decision
model of
user

15. POSITIVE THEORIES
• Expanded during the 1970s
• Based on ‘experiences’ or ‘facts’ of the
real world
• Explain the reasons for current
practice
• Predict the role of accounting
information in decision-making
15

16. POSITIVE THEORIES
The main difference between normative
and positive theories is that
 normative theories are prescriptive
 positive theories are descriptive,
explanatory or predictive
16

17. DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES
Scientific approach:
 has an inherent assumption that the
world to be researched is an objective
reality
 is carried out by incremental
hypotheses
 has an implied assumption that a good
theory holds under circumstances that
are constant across firms, industries
and time
17

18. DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES
Criticism of the scientific method:
 large-scale statistical research tends to
lump everything together
 it is conducted in environments that
are often remote from the world of or
the concerns of accountants
18

19. DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES
Naturalistic approach:
 implies that there are no preconceived
assumptions or theories
 focuses on firm-specific real-world
problems
19

20. DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES
Alternative ways of looking at the world:
20
CATEGORY ASSUMPTION
1. Reality as a concrete structure
2. Reality as a concrete process
3. Reality as a contextual field of information
4. Reality as a symbolic discourse
5. Reality as a social construction
6. Reality as projection of human imagination
For categories 1 – 3 it is more appropriate to
use the scientific approach
For categories 4-6 the naturalistic approach is
more appropriate

21. DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES
21

22. SOCIOLOGICAL AND
DISCURSIVE PERSPECTIVE
Schiell, Borba, and Murcia (2010)
Latour (1989) and Whitley (1984) – the
sociological and discursive perspective are
basically determined by the extent and
intensity of its interaction with society.
Accounting – a “socio-systemic” structure, with
input, process, and output.
The strong interdependence between science
and society.

23. SCIENTIFIC APPROACH
APPLIED TO ACCOUNTING
Misconceptions of purpose
Make scientists out of accounting practitioners
Researchers = practitioners
The desire for ‘absolute truth’
23
The scientific method does not claim to provide
‘truth’
It attempts to provide persuasive evidence which
may describe, explain or predict

24. ISSUES FOR AUDITING THEORY
CONSTRUCTION
Auditing is a verification process that is applied
to the accounting inputs and processes
Auditors provide an opinion on
 whether the financial statements accord with
the applicable reporting framework
 whether the statements give a true and fair
view
24

25. ISSUES FOR AUDITING THEORY
CONSTRUCTION
Auditing is a verification process that is applied
to the accounting inputs and processes
Auditors provide an opinion on
 whether the financial statements accord with
the applicable reporting framework
 whether the statements give a true and fair
view
25

26. ISSUES FOR AUDITING THEORY
CONSTRUCTION
Focus on the conduct of an audit – fraud
detection, discovery of errors of principles and
the nature of account verification.
Mautz and Sharaf (1961) – attempted to provide a
comprehensive theory of auditing with the
purpose to prevent the view that auditing was a
practical exercise – not requiring theoretical
development.
Concepts: evidence, due audit care, fair
representation, independence and ethical conduct
26

27. ISSUES FOR AUDITING THEORY
CONSTRUCTION
The normative era of accounting coincided with
a normative approach to auditing theory.
The positive ere of accounting has led to a
positive approach to auditing theory.
Experimentalists – micro-level understanding
of the audit testing or judgment process.
Judgements and decision making research.
27

28. SUMMARY
Many different approaches to theory
formulation in accounting
Evolution of accounting theory
 positive v. normative
 scientific v. naturalistic
28