Stuck in the middle with who? (Belatedly) engaging with Laughlin while becoming re-acquainted with Merton and middle range theorising

The paper engages with Laughlin's 1995 and 2004 contributions to the literature on accounting research methodology, seeking to critique and thereby extend his insights. It does so at a time when the discussion of methodological issues appears less important to many empirical accounting researchers than demonstrating a familiarity with the growing range of theoretical perspectives available to pursue such enquiries. The paper initially outlines Laughlin's original and revised frameworks, following which a number of the resultant attributions of specific schools of thought are questioned. The original categorisation exercise is concluded still to offer an insightful basis on which to compare and contrast empirical research approaches. For this reason, the same exercise is extended to locate three further, currently popular ways of seeing: institutional theory, actor network theory and practice theory. The focus then shifts to a more detailed exploration of the relationship that exists between Laughlin's idea of middle range thinking and Merton's characterisation of middle range theory and theorisation. Informed by the resultant insights, the middle range or substantive theory credentials of a range of schools of thought currently widely subscribed in interdisciplinary accounting research are then examined.

► Reviews and critiques Laughlin's contribution to accounting research methodology
► Locates further schools of thought within Laughlin's framework.
► Explores the relationship between middle range thinking and Merton's middle range theory.
► Outlines the middle range theory credentials of a range of currently influential schools of thought.
► Identifies the desirability of pursuing greater methodological self-awareness.