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. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.