Methodology choices and the construction of facts: Some implications from the sociology of scientific knowledge

Critical Perspectives on Accounting

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 207-231

  Lowe, Alan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WAIKATO   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Hierarchy of modalisation; Middle range thinking; Rhetoric; Sociology of scientific knowledge

Indexed keywords

EID: 0742324366     PISSN: 10452354     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1045-2354(03)00067-4     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Alvesson M, Deetz S. Doing critical management research. London: Sage; 2000.
2. Alvesson M, Skoldberg K. Reflexive methodology: new vistas for qualitative research. London: Sage; 2000.
3. Alvesson M, Willmott H, editors. Critical management studies. London: Sage; 1992.
4. Amsterdamska O. Surely, you must be joking, Monsieur Latour! Sci Tech Human Values 1990;15:495-504.
5. Ashmore M. The reflexive thesis: writing sociology of scientific knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1989.
6. Barnes B. Interests and the growth of knowledge. London: Routledge; 1977.
7. Barnes B. T.S. Kuhn and social science. London: Macmillan; 1982.
8. Bloomfield BP, Vurdubakis T. Visions of organisation and organisations of vision: the representational practices of information systems development. Acc Organ Society 1997;22(7):639-68.
9. Bloor D. Durkheim and Mauss revisited: classification and the sociology of knowledge. Stud Hist Philos Sci 1982;13:267-97.
10. Bloor D. Knowledge and social imagery. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1991.
11. Broadbent J, Laughlin R. Developing empirical research: an example informed by a Habermasian approach. Acc Aud Acc J 1997;10(5):622-48.
12. Burrell G, Morgan G. Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis. London: Heinemann; 1979.
13. Callon M. Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieux Bay. In: Law J, editor. Power, action and belief: a new sociology of knowledge? London: Routledge and Kegan Paul; 1986. p. 196-229.
14. Callon M, Latour B. Don't throw the baby out with the bath school! A reply to Collins and Yearley. In: Pickering A, editor. Science as practice and culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1992. p. 343-68.
15. Chua WF. Interpretive sociology and management accounting research - a critical review. Acc Aud Acc J 1988;1(2):59-79.
16. Clegg SR. Book review of we have never been modern by B. Latour. In: Theory Culture and Society, vol. 12/4. 1995, pp. 69-78.
17. Collins HM. The seven sexes: a study in the sociology of a phenomenon, or the replication of experiments in physics. Sociology 1975;9:205-24.
18. Collins HM. What is TRASP? The radical programme as a methodological imperative. Philos Soc Sci 1981;11:215-24.
19. Collins HM. An empirical relativist programme in the sociology of scientific knowledge. In: Knorr Cetina KD, Mulkay M, editors. Science observed: perspectives on the social study of science. London: Sage; 1983.
20. Collins HM. Changing order: replication and induction in scientific practice. London: Sage; 1985.
21. Collins HM, Cox G. Recovering relativity: did prophecy fail? Soc Stud Sci 1976;6:423-44.
22. Collins HM, Pinch T. Frames of meaning: the social construction of extraordinary science. London: Routledge; 1982.
23. Collins HM, Pinch T. The golem. What everyone should know about science. Cambridge: Canto; 1993.
24. Cooper DJ, et al. Tidiness, muddle and things: commonalities and divergencies in two approaches to management accounting research. Acc Organ Society 1983;8(2/3):269-86.
25. Duhem P. The aim and structure physical theory. New York: Atheneum; 1962.
26. Dyer W, Wilkins AL. Better stories, not better constructs, to generate better theory. Acad Manage Rev Mississippi State 1991;16(3):613-20.
27. Feyerabend PK. Against method. London: New Left Books; 1975.
28. Fuller S. On the motives for the new sociology of science. Hist Human Sci 1995;7:287-91.
29. Gilbert GN, Mulkay M. Warranting scientific belief. Soc Stud Sci 1982;12:383-408.
30. Gilbert GN, Mulkay M. Opening pandora's box: a sociological analysis of scientists' discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1984.
31. Gouldner A. The dialectic of ideology and technology. London: Macmillan; 1976.
32. Hacking I. The self vindication of the laboratory sciences. In: Pickering A, editor. Science and practice as culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1992.
33. Hacking I. The social construction of what? Harvard: Harvard University Press; 1999.
34. Hesse MB. The Structure of Scientific Inference. London: Macmillan; 1974.
35. Hesse MB. Revolutions and reconstructions in the philosophy of science. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf; 1980.
36. Hopper T, Powell A. Making sense of research into the organizational and social aspects of management accounting: a review of its underlying assumptions. J Manage Stud 1985;22(5):429-65.
37. Knorr Cetina KD. The manufacture of knowledge: an essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. Oxford: Pergamon Press; 1981.
38. Knorr Cetina KD. Relativism - what now? Soc Stud Sci 1982a;12:13-6.
39. Knorr Cetina KD. The constructivist programme in the sociology of science: retreats or advances. Soc Stud Sci 1982b;12:320-4.
40. Knorr Cetina KD. Laboratory studies: the cultural approach to the study of science. In: Jasanot S, Markle TG, Pinch T, Petersen J, editors. Handbook of science. Technology and society. London: Sage; 1995a.
41. Knorr Cetina KD. Liminal and referent epistemologies: the disunity of two leading sciences. In: Galison P, Stump D, editors. The disunity of science: boundaries, contexts and power. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press; 1995b.
42. Knorr Cetina KD. Epistemic cultures: how scientists make sense. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1996.
43. Knorr Cetina KD. Sociality with objects: social relations in postsocial knowledge societies. Theory Cult Society 1997;14(4):1-30.
44. Kuhn TS. The structure of scientific revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1970.
45. Kuhn TS. The essential tension: selected studies in scientific tradition and change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1977.
46. Lakatos I. Falsification and the methodology of scientitic research programmes. In: Lakatos I, Musgrave A, editors. Criticism and the growth of knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1970.
47. Latour B. Science in action. Milton Keynes: Open University Press; 1987.
48. Latour B. We have never been modern. Hemel Hempstead, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf; 1993.
49. Latour B. Pandora's hope: essays on the reality of science studies. Harvard: Harvard University Press; 1999.
50. Latour B, Woolgar S. Laboratory life: the construction of scientific facts. 2nd ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1986.
51. Laughlin R. Accounting systems in organisational contexts: a case for critical theory. Acc Organ Society 1987;12(5):479-502.
52. Laughlin R. Empirical research in accounting: alternative approaches and a case for middle range thinking. Acc Aud Acc J 1995;8(1):63-87.
53. Laughlin R, Lowe EA. A critical analysis of accounting thought: prognosis and prospects for understanding and changing accounting systems design. In: Cooper DJ, Hopper TM, editors. Critical accounts. London: Macmillan; 1990. p. 15-43.
54. Lynch M. Scientific practice and ordinary action: ethnomethodology and social studies of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1993.
55. Mannheim K. Essays on the sociology of knowledge. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul; 1925/1952.
56. Merton RK. Social theory and social structure. New York, NY: Free Press; 1968.
57. Merton RK. Science, technology and society in seventeenth-century England. New York: Harper & Row; 1970.
58. Merton RK. The sociology of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1973.
59. Miller P. The multiplying machine. Acc Organ Society 1997;22(3/4):355-64.
60. Mulkay M, Potter J, Yearley S. Why an analysis of scientific discourse is needed. In: Knorr Cetina KD, Mulkay M, editors. Science observed. London: Sage; 1983.
61. Pickering A. The role of interests in high-energy physics: the choice between charm and colour. In: Knorr Cetina KD, Krohn R, Whitley RD, editors. The social process of scientific investigation. Dordrecht: Reidel; 1981.
62. Pinch T. Confronting nature. Dordrecht: Reidel; 1986.
63. Potter J. Representing reality: discourse, rhetoric and social construction. London: Sage; 1996.
64. Quine WYO. From a logical point of view. 2nd ed. Harvard: Harvard University Press; 1961.
65. Quine WYO, Ullian JS. The web of belief. New York: Random House; 1970.
66. Roslender R. Critical management accounting. In: Ashton D, Hopper T, Scapens RW, editors. Issues in Management Accounting. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1995.
67. Shapin S. History of science and its sociological reconstructions. Hist Sci 1982;20:157-211.
68. Shapin S, Schaffer S. Leviathan and the air-pump. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1985.
69. Tinker A, Lehman G, Neimark M. Falling down the hole in the middle of the road. Acc Aud Acc J 1991;4(2):28-54.
70. Willmott H. Beyond paradigmatic closure in organisational enquiry. In: Hassard J, Pym D, editors. The theory and philosophy of organisations. London: Routledge; 1990. p. 44-60.
71. Willmott H. Breaking the paradigm mentality. Organ Stud 1993;14(5):681-719.
72. Woolgar S. Science: the very idea. London. 1988.