MENGISI KESENGGANGAN RUANG RISET AKUNTANSI DAN AUDITING MELALUI PARADIGMA INTERPRETIF DENGAN TEORI SOSIOLOGI
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21776/tema.23.2.89-107Keywords:
Social Theory, Accounting, Auditing, Interpretive ParadigmAbstract
This paper is a form of concern for accounting research which is assessed by the author subjectively as only 'merely' fulfilling various existing criteria as an administrative requirement in filling the workload. However, there are also many who really devote their thoughts to seeing a phenomenon and reality about accounting that is happening around them. Qualitative research, especially interpretive research is seen as more suitable for finding meaning from an existing reality. Even accounting and social sciences are currently seen as unable to stand alone when photographing the reality in accounting, there is a need for harmony between accounting science and social theories that can generally be used in interpretive research to derive meaning and uniqueness from the interpretive paradigm. this is the involvement of researchers with the subjects studied. The development of the interpretive paradigm used in accounting and auditing research is seen from the publication of articles with this paradigm in reputable national journals (Sinta 2). This paper explores research that uses an interpretive paradigm, so that it can see future opportunities from interpretive research using social theories that can be more diverse. This paper uses a literature review that can provide an overview of the wider scope of accounting and auditing research using social theories in the interpretive paradigm.
References
Anggraini, R. Y. (2017). Masuknya Paradigma Interpretif Pada Kajian Ilmu Akuntansi. Jurnal Analisa Akuntansi Dan Perpajakan, 1(1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.25139/jaap.v1i1.101.
Behling, O. (1980). The Case for the Natural Science Model for Research in Organizational Behavior and Organization Theory. Academy of Management Review, 5(4).
Burrel, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis. Heinemann Educational Books Ltd.
Chua, W. F. (1986a). Radical development of accounting thought. The Accounting Review, LXI (4), 601–632.
Chua, W. F. (1986b). Theoretical constructions of and by the real. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 11(6), 583–598. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(86)90037-1.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded Theory Research: Procedures, Canons, and Evaluative Criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3–21.
Coulon, A. (2003). Etnometodologi. KKSK & Yayasan Lengge Mataram.
Darmayasa, N., & Aneswari, Y. R. (2015). Paradigma Interpretif Pada Penelitian Akuntansi Indonesia. Jurnal Akuntansi Multiparadigma JAMAL, 6(59), 350–361.
Djasuli, M. (2017). Paradigma Interpretif pada Riset Akuntansi (Sebuah Opini: Peneliti Pemula tidak Terjebak dalam Penelitian Minimalis Akuntansi). Jurnal Pamator, 10(2), 97–106.
Garfilkel, H. (1967). Studies in Etnometodology. PrenticeHall, Inc.
Izzalqurny, T. R., & Nabila, F. (2021). Apakah paradigma nonpossitivsm (Interpretif, Kritis dan Posmodernis) dalam akuntansi ”ilmiah”? Maksimum: Media Akuntansi Umum Universitas Muhammadiyah Semarang, 11(1), 13–26. https://jurnal.unimus.ac.id/index.php/MAX/article/view/7040.
Kamayanti, A. (2016). Metodologi Konstruktif Riset Akuntansi (Membumikan Religiositas). Penerbit Peneleh.
Kesuma, U., & Hidayat, A. W. (2020). Pemikiran Thomas S. Kuhn Teori Revolusi Paradigma. Islamadina: Jurnal Pemikiran Islam, 166. https://doi.org/10.30595/islamadina.v0i0.6043.
Khomsiyah, & Indriantoro, N. (2000). Metodologi Penelitian Akuntansi Keperilakuan: Pendekatan Filsafat Ilmu. Jurnal Bisnis Dan Akuntansi, 2(2), 89–102.
Kuang, T., & Tin, S. (2010). Analisis Perkembangan Riset Akuntansi Keperilakuan Studi Pada Jurnal Behavioral Research in Accounting (1998-2003). Jurnal Akuntansi, 2(2), 122–133.
Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The University of Chicago Press.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook (Second Edi). Sage Publications.
Mulawarman, A. D. (2010). Integrasi Paradigma Akuntansi: Refleksi atas Pendekatan Sosiologi dalam Ilmu Akuntansi. Jurnal Akuntansi Multiparadigma, 1(1), 155–171.
Nugraha, E., & Setiawan, A. (2018). Pengampunan Pajak Sebuah Kajian Interpretif. Pengampunan Pajak Sebuah Kajian Interpretif, 10(2), 211–223. https://doi.org/10.17509/jaset.v10i2.13401.
Nurhayati, N. (2016). Melukiskan Akuntansi Dengan Kuas Interpretif. BISNIS: Jurnal Bisnis Dan Manajemen Islam, Vol. 3, No. 1, 174. https://doi.org/10.21043/bisnis.v3i 1.1481.
Reynolds, P. D. (2016). Primer in Theory Construction. Routledge.
Setiawan, A. R. (2011). Tinjauan Paradigma Penelitian: Merayakan Keragaman Pengembangan Ilmu Akuntansi. Jurnal Akuntansi Multiparadigma, 2(3), 369–540.
Shonhadji, N. (2021). Penggunaan Teori Sosial Dalam Paradigma Interpretif Pada Penelitian Akuntansi. Jurnal Kajian Akuntansi, 5(1), 2579–9975. http://jurnal.ugj.ac.id/index.php/jka.
Spradley, J. (2007). Metode Etnografi. Tiara Wacana.
Yusdita, E. E. (2017). Studi Interpretif Untuk Memahami Perilaku Keengganan Menggunakan E-Billing. Assets: Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Pendidikan, 6(1), 85. https://doi.org/10.25273/jap.v6i1.1295.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 TEMA
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
