Literature Review: Kuhn's Paradigm and Accounting Theory (ACCT 20074)

This report presents a literature review focusing on Thomas Kuhn's paradigm of scientific revolutions and its application to contemporary accounting theory. It examines Kuhn's concept of paradigms, which describes how scientific theories evolve through periods of stability and revolutionary change. The report discusses the failure of comparability between theories developed in different time periods, leading to the development of new theories through revolution. It then explores how Kuhn's paradigm has been used to analyze the history of accounting, particularly the work of Professor Ray J. Chambers, who introduced revolutionary concepts in accounting. The review assesses how Chambers' contributions, aimed at overcoming the limitations of conventional accounting, might be critiqued in light of Kuhn's theory. The report includes an analysis of the normative approach in accounting standards and the parallelism between political and scientific research development. It further examines the role of paradigm shifts in driving crises and the need for societal reconstruction. The report concludes by highlighting the importance of considering historical facts and social credibility in understanding the evolution of accounting theories, referencing specific academic sources.

Running head: CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNTING THEORY
Contemporary accounting theory
Name of the student
Name of the university
Authors note

1
CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNTING THEORY
Table of Contents
Part B..............................................................................................................................2
Literature review of Kuhn’s paradigm and social scientific revolution.....................2
References......................................................................................................................4

2
CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNTING THEORY
Part B
Literature review of Kuhn’s paradigm and social scientific revolution
As per Kuhn’s theory of scientific revolution structure, an ample amount of research
had conducted in this case. The theory deals with failure to compatibility and the
establishment of new theoretical aspects. Kuhn had described a paradigm by explaining the
overall academic development in the process of supply chain management techniques about
the contemporary period. One point of the parallelism had restricted to the segment of the
political community, in which the existing institutions have created adequate possible
outcomes (Edwards 2014). Thus, in the same way, the scientific revolutions in the growing.
Again the process had restricted a small subdivision of the scientific community. Hence the
existing paradigm had ceased to the functional ability of exploration to the aspect. Thus the
paradigm lead by the political and scientific elements had made those revolutions effective to
those paradigms.
On the other hand, the study had also talked about the normative approach. In addition
to the process the standards had been affected by the prerequisite of resolutions. Hence this
theory is discovered over violation of model in related to normative research (Unegbu 2014).
On the other hand, the generic aspect of the parallelism between political and
scientific research development is no longer open to doubt. Thus there are no aspects of the
significance on the first dependents. The political revolutions had aimed to change over the
governmental institutions where they can prohibit the process. The success aspect does not
rely on the set of institutions and the same had already affected the role of paradigms. Thus
the overall increasing number of crises is dependent on the society reconstruction where the
others are seeking to defend the old process rather than welcoming any new challenges. Thus

3
CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNTING THEORY
due to this change, the political matrix had failed. On the other hand in case of the
institutional form, it had felt to be achieved or evaluated (Gaffikin, 2014).
Thus the resultant circumstances do not make the arguments wrong, but the paradigm
had argued in defence. Nevertheless, it can provide a clear example of scientific practice and
to assert any relevant community. However, there is no such standard choice of discussing
the revolutionary change and hence the same is to be impacted to nature, and logical aspects
are higher than the persuasive argumentation related to the quality standard groups to
constitute the scientific community (Bedford & Ziegler 2016).
On the other hand to discover the paradigm choice as per theoretical view, the same
can never be settled and experimented alone. However, the process must look to add
numerous amount of examples towards the nature of science. Thus by granting the paradigm,
there is a rejection of the historical facts. On the other hand, the process is ready to illuminate
social credibility and confusion. Lastly, it can also say that the assimilation of a new sort of
phenomenon or the scientific theory must be looking to imply the demand for rejection over
the process of the older paradigm.

4
CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNTING THEORY
References
Bedford, N. M., & Ziegler, R. E. (2016). The contributions of AC Littleton to accounting
thought and practice. Memorial Articles for 20th Century American Accounting
Leaders, 49, 219.
Edwards, J. R. (Ed.). (2014). Twentieth Century Accounting Thinkers (RLE Accounting).
Routledge.
Gaffikin, M. J. (2014). Accounting Methodology and the Work of RJ Chambers (RLE
Accounting). Routledge.
Unegbu, A. O. (2014). Theories of accounting: e
volution & developments, income-determination, and diversities in use. arXiv preprint
arXiv:1411.4633.