Abstract
This paper suggests how the contemporary theory of causality, based on the notions of counterfactuality and contrastive thinking, offers helpful direction on how to generate plausible causal arguments in interpretive research. For an interpretive researcher, this opens a route from rich emic accounts to thick explanations; however, only if he/she so wishes and the research question so requires. Perhaps with some surprise, causality can be included in interpretive research framings without compromising the unique features of such research – actually by even building on some of its strongholds. Examples from interpretive management accounting research will illustrate the message of the paper.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
