{"title":"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","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":"{\"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}","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}
Sociomateriality, agential realism, and the metaphysics of accounting information systems: A response to Vosselman and De Loo
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.
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.