Positivism and "alternative" accounting research
Accounting is a vibrant and dynamic area, which in the last decades has assumed prime importance in the economy, in society, and in the world in general. Research in the eld is particularly relevant given the potential e@ ect that accounting information can produce and disseminate in society (namely among decision and policy makers) However, the research in the area has been accused of being sterile and stagnant. In this Editorial, I intend to assess its development over time and re, ect upon its current problems and challenges.Until the 1960s, the dominant theoretical and methodological paradigm in accounting research was normative, based on the assumption that individuals seek to maximize gains and process information in a perfect way, to which they have access at zero cost and that there is no uncertainty (Ryan, Scapens, " eobald, 2002; Scapens, 2006) " e idea was that it was the job of accounting researchers to develop models and tools that could be useful for company managers and help them to make decisions. In other words, the researchers should prescribe excellent solutions and models in the accounting manuals, which if properly implemented by managers (i.e. following the rules and prescriptions indicated) would lead companies to achieve higher levels of performance. " e search for the answer to the question "what should managers do?" nely illustrates the concerns of normative researchers (Scapens, 2006) " e shortcomings of this paradigm and the irrelevance of the theoretical models developed during this period for companies led researchers, such as Robert Scapens in the United Kingdom, to alert the academic and scienti~ c community to the gap between theory (textbooks) and practice (companies) (Scapens, 1994, 2006; Bromwich Scapens, 2016).From the 1970s onwards, positivist or empirical research came to be the dominant paradigm, seeking to answer the question "what should managers do?" by observing reality and developing universal laws (Ryan et al