Sociomateriality, agential realism, and the metaphysics of accounting information systems: A response to Vosselman and De Loo

IF 4.1 3区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS International Journal of Accounting Information Systems Pub Date : 2023-08-10 DOI:10.1016/j.accinf.2023.100639
Ron Weber
{"title":"Sociomateriality, agential realism, and the metaphysics of accounting information systems: A response to Vosselman and De Loo","authors":"Ron Weber","doi":"10.1016/j.accinf.2023.100639","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>I respond to Vosselman and De Loo’s (2023) critique of my earlier paper on agential realism, representation theory, and accounting information systems (Weber, 2020). In that paper, I argued that little is learned by using an agential realism lens to study accounting-related phenomena. I claimed that insights revealed using agential realism also could have been revealed through using existing lenses such as actor-network theory and general systems theory. In particular, I defended representation theory as a way of studying accounting information systems and representationalism as a way of studying the world. Contrariwise, Vosselman and De Loo argue that representation theory and representationalism are useful only in some respects when studying accounting-related phenomena. They contend that agential realism and sociomateriality lenses are needed if the entangled nature of phenomena in accounting domains is to be understood. They point to some assumptions that they claim underpin representationalism and representation theory—assumptions that inhibit their usefulness as a way of studying entangled phenomena. In this response, I present counter-arguments to their claims and defend representationalism and representation theory as ways of understanding the world.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47170,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Accounting Information Systems","volume":"51 ","pages":"Article 100639"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Accounting Information Systems","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1467089523000313","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

I respond to Vosselman and De Loo’s (2023) critique of my earlier paper on agential realism, representation theory, and accounting information systems (Weber, 2020). In that paper, I argued that little is learned by using an agential realism lens to study accounting-related phenomena. I claimed that insights revealed using agential realism also could have been revealed through using existing lenses such as actor-network theory and general systems theory. In particular, I defended representation theory as a way of studying accounting information systems and representationalism as a way of studying the world. Contrariwise, Vosselman and De Loo argue that representation theory and representationalism are useful only in some respects when studying accounting-related phenomena. They contend that agential realism and sociomateriality lenses are needed if the entangled nature of phenomena in accounting domains is to be understood. They point to some assumptions that they claim underpin representationalism and representation theory—assumptions that inhibit their usefulness as a way of studying entangled phenomena. In this response, I present counter-arguments to their claims and defend representationalism and representation theory as ways of understanding the world.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
社会物质性、代理现实主义和会计信息系统的形而上学:对Vosselman和De Loo的回应
我回应了Vosselman和De Loo(2023)对我早期关于代理现实主义、代表理论和会计信息系统的论文的批评(Weber,2020)。在那篇论文中,我认为,使用代理现实主义的视角来研究会计相关现象所学到的东西很少。我声称,使用代理现实主义揭示的见解也可以通过使用现有的镜头来揭示,如行动者网络理论和一般系统理论。特别是,我为代表理论作为研究会计信息系统的一种方式和代表主义作为研究世界的一种方法进行了辩护。相反,Vosselman和De Loo认为,在研究会计相关现象时,代表理论和代表主义只在某些方面有用。他们认为,如果要理解会计领域现象的纠缠本质,就需要代理现实主义和社会物质性的视角。他们指出了一些假设,他们声称这些假设是表征论和表征理论的基础,这些假设阻碍了它们作为研究纠缠现象的有用性。在这篇回应中,我对他们的主张提出了反驳,并为具象主义和具象理论作为理解世界的方式进行了辩护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.00
自引率
6.50%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Accounting Information Systems will publish thoughtful, well developed articles that examine the rapidly evolving relationship between accounting and information technology. Articles may range from empirical to analytical, from practice-based to the development of new techniques, but must be related to problems facing the integration of accounting and information technology. The journal will address (but will not limit itself to) the following specific issues: control and auditability of information systems; management of information technology; artificial intelligence research in accounting; development issues in accounting and information systems; human factors issues related to information technology; development of theories related to information technology; methodological issues in information technology research; information systems validation; human–computer interaction research in accounting information systems. The journal welcomes and encourages articles from both practitioners and academicians.
期刊最新文献
Bridging the gap in talent: A framework for interdisciplinary research on autism spectrum disorder persons in accounting and information systems A scoping review of ChatGPT research in accounting and finance Digital transformation voluntary disclosure: Insights from leading European companies Understanding cybersecurity breach contagion effects: The role of the loss heuristic and internal controls Internal control risk disclosure, media coverage and stock price crash risk: Evidence from China
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1