会计研究的作用(中英文)

CHAPTER 14

The Role of Accounting Research

会计研究的作用

Throughout this book, we use science’s concept of theory (positive theory). Under that concept, the objective of accounting theory is to explain and predict accounting practice (broadly defined).However, as we note in Chapter 1,the accounting literature includes other views of theory.In many of those other views, the objective of theory appears to be the production of prescriptions for government accounting policy (i.e., for accounting standards and regulation of disclosure). Proponents of those views assume an objective function and, based on assumptions regarding how the world works (an implicit positive theory), deduce accounting prescriptions. The emphasis is on the prescription rather than on the positive theory underlying it. There is typically no attempt to test the underlying theory, and the theory is often countrary to accepted empirical hypotheses (e.g., the efficient markets hypothesis).

科学上的理论概念（实证理论）贯穿于本书。根据这一概念，会计理论的目标在于解释和预测广义上的会计事务。然而，正如第1章所介绍的，会计理论还包括了关于理论的其他观点。在许多观点中，会计理论的目标似乎是为政府制定会计政策服务（即为会计准则或信息解释管制服务）。这些观点的倡导者首先假设一个目标函数，有关现实世界如何运行的假设（一种含蓄的实证性理论），推断出具体的会计规定。这种做法强调的是规范，而不是这种规范所赖以存在的实证理论。在一般情况下，他们并未试图验证其理论基础，而该基础经常与为人们所认可的经验性假设（如有效市场假说）相矛盾。

On the surface, this prescriptive literature is contradictory. If its proponents are serious about their prescriptions, they would be concerned about the predictive ability of their implicit positive theory.Unless the theory is predictive, the prescriptions are unlikely to achieve their objective. In Chapter 1 we explain the demand for positive theories. Individuals demand positive theories to predict the conseqences of their actions. That includes individuals in standard-setting bodies (such as the FASB and SEC).Those individuals want to predict the consequences of adopting particular standards or accounting policy prescriptions.So the apparent users of the prescriptive literature want a theory that explains and predicts. Why then do we observe a prescriptive accounting literature that emphasizes prescription and logic, but not the predictive ability of the underlying theory?

从表面上看，规范性理论是自相矛盾的。如果其倡导者认真考虑其所制定的规范，他们就会注意到其内含的实证理论所具有的预测能力。除非该理论具有预测能力，否则各种规范就不可能取得预期目标。第1章已经介绍了对实证理论的需求。人们需要实证理论来预测其行为的结果。实证理论的使用者还包括准则制定机构（会计准则委员会和证券交易委员会）。这些机构需要对执行特定准则或会计政策的后果进行预测，因此规范性理论的主要使用者需要一种解释和预测的理论。然而，为什么我们观察到的大多数会计理论侧重于规范性和逻辑性，而不重视其具有预测作用的理论基础？

We think the answer is that there is a demand for accounting literature in addition to the demand for positive accounting theory. That additional demand arises in the political process described in Chapter 10 and is the demand for excuses.Individuals want accounting policy prescriptions for self-interest reasons (e.g., electric utility managers want an accounting standard so they can argue for use of the required procedure in rate setting). But, in a political process that is a competition for wealth transfers and is characterized by costly information, it isn’t optimal to announce publicy that you want the prescription is in the public interest (e.g., maximizes some