英语论文网

positive accounting research conclusions and the originality of the major premise of normative accounting research as well as its validity. What’s more, both normative and positive accounting researches ignore the fact that mankind’s cognition is a process from specialty to generality and back and forth and that it is characterized by graduality and transportation and is the unity of logicism and non-logicism. Therefore, to unilaterally stress either of them is unscientific. Also, positive accounting research is usually fit for justifying or disapproving concrete accounting theoretical issues but is incapable of doing research on the whole accounting theoretical frameworks, which is depending on normative accounting research.
Suggestions: first, normative accounting research usually starts from a minority of basic accounting connotations (basic accounting hypothesis or accounting objectives) and derives a set of basic principles instructing accounting processing by way of deduction while the majority positive accounting research generally induces one or more propositions in line with abundant accounting phenomena and make of several accounting data coming from accounting information market to make empirical test or justify or disapprove achieved research accomplishment. In one word, normative accounting research represents the accountants’ cognition of the essences of accounting phenomena from concrete ones to general ones while positive accounting research represents the other way around. According to the epistemology of materialism, our cognition of accounting phenomena is the organic combination of general-to-concrete with concrete-to-general, so normative accounting research and positive accounting research should not be regarded with biases.
Second, normative accounting research often grasps the internal logical consistency of the whole theoretical framework of accounting from a relatively high-level accounting theory, such as the research on conceptual framework of financial accounting whose findings often serve as a basis for the development of accounting policies; and positive accounting research often aims at the specific issue of accounting theory, such as in what circumstances the valuation of stock should apply FIFO method or LIFO method. In recent years, the trend of empirical accounting research is that the problem researched is getting smaller and more detailed so that some normative accounting researchers take the opportunity to attack a number of positive accounting research contribute nothing to the whole theoretical system of accounting. I don’t think of it the same way. Actually, positive accounting research is the foundation of normative accounting research for the former aims at revealing “what it is”. Only if one masters the essence of various accounting phenomena, he can inquire into “what it should be” in the logical sense; normative accounting research is the premise and final goal of positive accounting research for the final goal of doing research on accounting phenomena is not only about “what it is” but also about “what it should be”. In other words, normative accounting research and positive accounting research are relevant to the level of accounting target system (in fact, as is pointed out in True blood, accounting target is a multi-level system). The lower the level of accounting target is, the stronger the positive of research will be. Higher as the level of accounting target is, more ev本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。