paradigms – Page 3

News

ARTICLE 51: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Hermeneutics

24th Sep 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Introduction

Must research be agony and pain to be good quality?

Can research be fun?

Most of you will probably agree that academic research can be interesting, but do you enjoy doing it?

Do you feel guilty when you enjoy collecting and analyzing data?

Why would you do research about a topic in which you have no interest and that is of no consequence to anybody?

Hermeneutics is the perfect paradigm for a topic that can take you on an emotional roller coaster ride.

I discuss hermeneutics in this post.

What is Hermeneutics?

Hermeneutics is the aspect of a study that involves interpreting the event or events being studied.

Originally, Hermeneutics referred to the study and interpretation of written biblical text.

Now it includes the interpretation of any form of communication,

Including verbal, artistic, geopolitical, physiological, sociological, etc.

It strives towards deeper understanding of the political, historical, sociocultural, and other real-world contexts within which they occur.

Language and history play an important role in the interpretation of events and phenomena.

Hermeneutics represents a specific perspective on data analysis.

In terms of communication, hermeneutics views inquiry as conversation and conversation as a source of data that can and should be used for research.

Hermeneutics is not based on theoretical knowledge only, but also includes the analysis of practical actions or omissions.

Hermeneutics is now applied in all the human sciences to clarify or interpret conditions that need to be understood for whatever reason.

Hermeneutics focuses on interaction and language.

It involves recapturing the meanings of interaction with other people.

Hermeneutics involves the analysis of meaning in a social context.

The intentions of other role-players are recovered and reconstructed to make sense of the current situation.

In hermeneutics theories are developed or borrowed and continually tested, looking for discrepant data and alternative ways of making sense of the data.

It is not the purpose of hermeneutics to offer explanations or to provide authoritative rules or conceptual analysis, but rather to seek and deepen understanding.

As a mode of analysis, it suggests a way of understanding or making meaning of textual data.

Objectivity is sought by analyzing our prejudices and perceptions.

Even so, ambiguity is not regarded as an obstacle to qualitative research and it is accepted that interpretation will sometimes be typical and perhaps even unique to a situation or context.

A hermeneutic approach is open to the ambiguous nature of textual analysis and resists the urge to offer authoritative readings and neat reconciliations.

Rather, it recognizes the uniquely situated nature of interpretation.

This means that events and phenomena can have different meanings in different contexts.

From this we can already see that generalized and authoritative theories will seldom result from research making use of hermeneutics as paradigm.

You, as the researcher, are free to accept or reject the interpretations of others, and you can add your own interpretation to the data that you use in your research.

You can also review historical text if you feel that it is necessary.

In the process you will also learn while contributing to the available knowledge in a particular field of study.

Understanding occurs when you recognize the significance of the data that you are interpreting and when you recognize the interrelatedness of the different elements of the phenomenon.

Many human, religious and philosophical scientists elaborated on and added to the nature of hermeneutics.

Two useful elaborations are, firstly the realization that rich data can be gained from expression and comprehension.

And secondly, that hermeneutical analysis is a circular process.

Let me explain this by means of the figure that you can now see on your screen.

The hermeneutic circle signifies a methodological process of understanding.

Understanding consist of two independent processes, namely understanding the meaning of the whole of a text or any other data and coming to understand the parts of the whole.

In this regard, ‘understanding the meaning of the whole’ means making sense of the parts.

Grasping the meaning of the parts depends on having some sense of the whole.

Each part is what it is by virtue of its location and function with respect to the whole.

The hermeneutic circle takes place when this meaning-making quest involves continual shifts from the parts to the whole and back again.

The hermeneutic data analysis process is aimed at deciphering the hidden meaning in the apparent meaning.

Therefore, in analyzing the data you are searching for and unfolding the levels of meaning implied in the literal meaning of the text.

Consequently, in designing your research, you will deliberately plan to collect data that is textually rich.

You should analyze the textually rich data to make sense of the bigger picture or whole.

Understanding requires the interpretation of words, signs, events, body language, artefacts and any other objects or behavior from which a message can be deduced.

Hermeneutics provides the philosophical grounding for the interpretive paradigms, including interpretivism, relativism, ethnomethodology, symbolic interactionism, constructivism and phenomenology.

It is also possible to associate and integrate hermeneutics with critical research paradigms.

Hermeneutics opposes rationalism, positivism, scientism and modernism.

These are all predominantly technicist paradigms.

It is, therefore, clear that hermeneutics is more suited for qualitative research rather than quantitative research.

Some researchers question the circular nature of hermeneutic investigation because setting understanding as a prerequisite for the parts as well as the whole is a catch twenty-two situation.

You cannot understand the parts if you do not understand the whole and you cannot understand the whole if you do not understand the parts.

A second criticism against hermeneutics is that viewing conversation as inquiry can damage the validity of your research conclusions and findings.

Summary

Hermeneutics:

Deals with interpretation.
Uses language and interaction as data.
Seeks to understand rather than to explain.
Deepens understanding.
Involves the analysis of meaning in a social context.
Acknowledges that interpretation can be different in different situations and contexts.
Recognizes the role of history in interpretation.
Views conversation as inquiry.
Is a circular process. AND
Is comfortable with ambiguity.

Rich data can be gathered from how things are said and understood.

Theories are developed or borrowed and continually tested.

Hermeneutics can be associated with all the interpretivist and some critical paradigms.

Hermeneutics is opposed to the technicist paradigms.

Criticism against hermeneutics are that the analysis of data is a circular process and that viewing conversation as data can damage the validity of conclusions and findings.

News

ARTICLE 50: Research Methods for Ph. D. Studies: Functionalism

22nd Sep 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Introduction

What do you think will the world look like when the COVID-19 pandemic is over?

How will the world function?

Who will play the key roles in the new system?

Which businesses will survive?

Will new businesses come to the fore?

What will politics look like?

Who will play the leading roles in governments?

Against what criteria will political leaders be elected?

Will the world have learned anything good from the crisis?

Functionalism will be a good paradigm to use if you plan on doing research to find out what the world will look like after the pandemic.

What is Functionalism?

Biological organisms have systems that perform various specialist and survival functions.

Similarly, social institutions ‘function’ in a systematic and coherent way through their constituent elements to ensure their survival and optimal functioning.

Airlines, for example, were indispensable in the pre-pandemic world.

But will they still play such a critical role in the post-pandemic reality?

Role differentiation and social solidarity are key elements in the smooth functioning of any organization.

This means that functionalism interprets each part of society in terms of how it contributes to the stability of the whole society.

Medical and health systems were always critically important to human beings.

Some might argue that they are currently more important than even governments.

What will it look like once the virus has been brought under control?

Society is more than the sum of its parts because the contributions of all members of a society facilitate the performance of the society as a whole.

It is in times of crisis that the roles of the elements of a system are tested the most.

All around the world people are asking if organizations and bodies on all possible levels were able to deal with the current world crisis.

Small, medium, and large businesses, countries, unions, federations, even families are tested to their absolute limits.

Everyone plays an important part and the absence, or inability of an individual to contribute, detrimentally affects the performance of the community.

According to functionalism, an institution only exists because it serves an important role in the community.

Drive-in theaters all closed their gates when the television and computers, with the internet, took over.

Now it would seem that drive-in theaters might just make a comeback.

An individual or organization that does not play a role in the community will not survive.

How many political and business leaders showed their mettle and will survive the crisis?

This applies to individuals and groupings on all levels in society.

Individual, families, clubs, schools, suburbs, cities, countries, etc. all will only survive if they add value to the community.

Organizations and societies evolve and adjust to changing conditions to ensure the continued, smooth, integrated functioning of all elements of the organization or society.

When new needs evolve or emerge, new organizations will be created to satisfy the new needs.

When any part of the society is dysfunctional, it affects all other parts and creates problems for the entire society.

This often leads to social, political, economic, and technological change.

The mental state rather than the internal constitution of the researcher is important.

This implies that motivation plays an important role in what you would be willing to do to achieve success, that is the purpose of the research project.

The country that is most motivated and has the knowledge and skills to find a vaccine might save the world.

Functionalism includes structuralism because both paradigms investigate the functioning of social phenomena.

Like structuralism, functionalism also reacts against post-structuralism because of the disruptive nature of the latter.

Some researchers feel that functionalism focuses too much on the positive functions of societies while neglecting the impact of negative events.

A second point of criticism against functionalism is that the current nature of functionalism is no longer in line with the original spirit and purpose of the paradigm.

Researchers sometimes try to gain conclusions and findings from the ontology of a society when it might not even be relevant to the current phenomena any longer.

Thirdly, findings gained from a functional philosophical stance are not always generalizable because organizations and societies often differ in terms of their structure and purpose.

Summary

Functionalism deals with survival and optimal functioning.

Individuals as well as groups must contribute to the functioning of a society to achieve solidarity.

Organizations and societies evolve and adjust to changes in the environment.

A society can be regarded as a system of independent parts with each part fulfilling a separate role.

The mental state of the researcher, especially his or her motivation, is important to achieve accurate, valid and authentic research result.

Functionalism can be associated with structuralism.

Functionalism is opposed to post-structuralism.

Criticism against functionalism is that it is no longer related to its original ontology, that too much focus is placed on positive functioning and that it is too ideological.

News

ARTICLE 49: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Feminism

21st Sep 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Introduction

Feminism is often such an emotional topic that it would be almost impossible to keep arguments emotionless.

Even so, in the patriarchic academic world in which we conduct research, the female researcher who manages to keep her arguments and findings unemotional and objective will probably achieve more than those who try to compensate for inconsistent research with emotional arguments.

We cannot deny that women are different from men – even though equal.

Women will probably manage an organization differently from men, but their management style can be as effective, if not better, than that of a man.

Even though the principles and requirements for research are the same for men and women, they can still approach the research differently and be equally effective.

I discuss feminism in this post.

What is Feminism?

Feminism is grounded in feminist values and beliefs.

Philosophically speaking feminism is the movement for the political, social, economic and educational equality of women with men.

The ontology of feminism is that there is a ‘reality’ that has been created and shaped by social, political, cultural, economic, ethnic and gender-based forces.

These forces have evolved over time into social structures that are accepted as natural, cultural or in different other ways justified.

Feminist issues can be access to employment, education, childcare, contraception, abortion, equality in the workplace, changing family roles, redress, sexual harassment and the need for equal political representation.

The basic epistemological principles of feminism include the taking of women and gender as the focus of analysis; the importance of consciousness-raising; the rejection of subject and object; a concern with ethics and an intention to empower women and change power relations and inequality.

Simply stated, feminism is research done by, for and about women.

Feminism seeks to include women in the research process and to focus on the meanings that women give their world, while recognizing that research must often be conducted within universities that are sometimes still patriarchal.

Feminism is often used as the grounds for advocacy campaigns.

Research in support of the interests of women mostly aims to emancipate them and to improve their lives.

The aim of research on women is often to clarify bias and inequity in the way that women are treated in various social settings.

Examples of such settings include the workplace, universities, sport and many more.

Research on women also often include filling gaps in our knowledge about women.

Even though feminism is mostly directed at achieving equality between women and men, it also argues that women think and express themselves differently from men.

Feminism is characterized by its double dimension and diversity.

As opposed to traditional research, its objectives include both the construction of new knowledge and the production of social change.

Feminism assumes that women are oppressed in society, therefore research is used to help reduce such discrimination.

In terms of diversity, feminism can be multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary.

This means that it uses different methodologies and it is constantly being redefined by the concerns of women coming from different perspectives.

In terms of being multidisciplinary, feminism can utilize knowledge borrowed from any other discipline that is relevant to the topic and purpose of the research.

In terms of being interdisciplinary, feminism can analyze, synthesize, harmonize and ultimately link the knowledge borrowed from other disciplines to integrate and systematize findings into a coherent whole.

Transdisciplinary refers to feminist research contributing to and sharing knowledge with other disciplines.

Feminism, therefore, requires that issues such as antiracism, diversity, democratic decision-making, and the empowerment of women are addressed in any field of study where gender-related issues call for research.

In terms of research methodology feminism actively seeks to remove the power imbalance between research and subject.

It is politically motivated in that it seeks to change social inequality.

It begins with the standpoint and experiences of women.

Feminism uses a wide variety of research methods, including methods belonging with the qualitative, quantitative and mixed approaches.

A qualitative approach is mostly favored because it lends itself better to reflect the measure of human experience without focusing too strongly on males while neglecting the role of women in a particular social, economic, political or technological setting.

Feminism shares an academic as well as an affective link with neoliberalism, post-colonialism, critical theory, critical race theory, romanticism, and post-structuralism.

All these paradigms deal with inequality and discrimination.

Although feminism and structuralism deal with power relations between people, feminism seldom uses the rigorous approach to research that is typical of structuralism.

Ironically, the unemotional and clinical approach that is typical of structuralism might be what is needed to elevate feminism to a more generally accepted research paradigm.

The main objection to feminism as a research paradigm is not that it is invalid or irrelevant, as some might claim, but rather that the very supporters of the philosophy are causing damage by the emotional way it is sometimes put forward.

Some academics feel that the way in which it is applied and the spirit in which people write about feminism is sometimes overly emotional and lacking academic substance.

Summary

The ontology of feminism is that social structures evolved over time towards natural gender equality.

Feminism:

Is a movement for the equality of women with men.
Strives for the empowerment of women.
Rejects subject and object as differential concepts.
Is concerned with ethics.
Strives for consciousness raising for the status and rights of women.

A wide range of issues can be investigated by making use of feminism as a paradigm.

Research is done by, for and about women.

Women, therefore, are the focus of analysis.

Feminism can be associated with critical theory, critical race theory, post-structuralism, romanticism and neoliberalism.

Feminism is opposed to structuralism.

Feminism is sometimes criticized for lack of academic consistency and for following an over-emotional philosophy.

News

ARTICLE 47: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Empiricism

19th Sep 2020 No Comments

Group of young interns listening carefully to an experienced doctor of medicine

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Introduction

I often wonder if the developers of paradigms were serious when they made claims like:

The only way in which you can learn is through experience, OR

You cannot learn anything from interviewing people, OR

External reality has no effect on behaviour.

Fortunately, most paradigms are quite flexible when it comes to the ways in which truth can be discovered.

And most, if not all of them, can be integrated.

Empiricism, however, is claimed by many to be an exclusivist paradigm.

Meaning that it cannot be integrated with other paradigms.

Or can it?

I discuss empiricism in this post.

What is Empiricism?

Empiricism is the doctrine that all knowledge is derived from sense experience.

It means that all evidence of facts and phenomena must be empirical, or at least empirically based.

Evidence should be directly or indirectly observable by the senses.

Also, people must experience things before they will learn.

The idea that people can learn through reasoning independently of the senses or through intuition is rejected.

Innate ideas and superiority of knowledge do not exist.

According to empiricism, people are born with empty brains, like a clean slate.

As people experience phenomena, the brain is filled by what they learn from experience.

Two learning processes take place –

The individual experiences a sensation and then reflects on the sensation.

Reflection, in turn, leads to new or improved knowledge.

Experience can be something that people learn from events in which they participated.

Events can be things that happened to them and observations that they made.

Experience can also be simulated through deliberate and pre-planned experimental arrangements.

Sense experience is, therefore, the ultimate source of all our concepts and knowledge.

Empiricists present complementary lines of thought if it is integrated with rationalist arguments.

First, they develop accounts of how experience provides the information that rationalists site, insofar as we have it in the first place.

However, the knowledge that we have was obtained through previous experiences.

Secondly, we can “create” experiences by doing experiments and building models, which can be simulations of reality.

In that manner we can gain knowledge through self-created experiences.

Empiricism favours quantitative research methods, although it can be used with quantitative, qualitative or mixed research methods.

Its leaning towards quantitative research is demonstrated by the fact that it can be associated with positivism.

Because positivism is even more technicist in nature.

And secondly, positivism also makes a clear distinction between objective facts and values.

Thirdly, both positivism and empiricism regard sense data that is uncontaminated by value or theory as the ultimate objective.

Empiricism is sometimes used in association with critical theory or any of the paradigms associated with critical theory.

Empiricism can also support scepticism as an alternative to rationalism.

Rationalists argue that, if experience cannot provide the concepts or knowledge, then we do not have them.

Empiricists do not agree with the rationalists’ account of how reason is the source of concepts and knowledge.

Empiricism is in opposition to structuralism because empiricism believes that learning is derived from gaining experience while structuralism focuses on interrelationships between objects, concepts and ideas.

Most importantly, however, is the fact that structuralism is used in research on events or phenomena that already exist, which means that knowledge also already exists.

According to empiricism, people can learn without reasoning.

Empiricism provides for accumulating further knowledge after having gained knowledge through earlier experiences.

Most empiricists accept that learning is a continuous process.

Accumulating facts and knowledge are a second goal of what is called “naïve empiricism”.

Summary

The philosophy behind empiricism is that all knowledge of matters of fact derives from experience.

The mind is not furnished with a set of concepts in advance of experience.

Knowledge must be deduced or inferred from actual events.

Reasoning and intuition are rejected as sources of learning.

Empiricists believe that innate ideas and superiority of knowledge do not exist.

People are born with an empty brain that is filled by experiencing phenomena through the senses.

Two learning processes take place – experiencing and reflection.

Experience can be simulated.

Prior knowledge is accepted in naïve empiricism and if empiricism is integrated with rationalist thinking.

Any research method can use empiricism although quantitative research is favoured.

Empiricism can be associated with:

Most interpretivist paradigms.
Some technicist paradigms, notably positivism and rationalism.
Some critical paradigms, for example scepticism and structuralism.

News

ARTICLE 45: Research Methods for Ph. D. Studies: Critical Race Theory

16th Sep 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Introduction

What is the truth?

Just think about it – 29 paradigms, 29 different ways in which the truth can be perceived.

And there are many more that I will not discuss because some of them are not suitable for research purposes. Some are concepts, others are value systems, a third group focus more on applications rather than research.

I mentioned in my previous post that paradigms should help us to achieve meaningful patterns and theories and that we should guard against subjectivity.

Accepting more than twenty-nine ways in which to perceive the truth is already gambling with objectivity, authenticity, validity and accuracy in our research.

If we, moreover, ignore our responsibility to do research in an ethical manner, our theses or dissertations will end up being fictitious novels.

I will discuss critical race theory and how it should be approached in this post.

Critical Race Theory

Critical race theory focuses on the application of critical theory in terms of race.

It objects to the perception of racial power, especially where it is overtly or covertly supported by legislation, which would render it institutionalized.

Institutionalized racism is the structures, legislation, policies, practices and norms resulting in differential access and opportunities between racial groups.

It can manifest itself in any situation where needs exist.

Such needs can be material, psychological, political, technological, social, economic or power needs.

In critical race theory intentional discrimination is resisted on all terrains where people are involved.

For example, universities, schools, employment in the private and public sectors, sport, etc.

Critical race theory favours an aggressive, race-conscious, approach to transformation.

Although the starting point is often simple racial inequality, political and legislative transformation can be even more important objectives.

Critical race theory is often used to combat racial discrimination, facilitate the upliftment and growth of disadvantaged communities, redress historical racial discrimination, etc.

Critical race theory focuses on discrimination of one race against another.

It is not the reserve of any one race, and the victims of discrimination can be a minority or majority racial group.

Critical race theory mostly investigates the achievement of racial emancipation and equality.

It can be addressed in any field of study, although social studies embrace the paradigm the most.

Historical and current incidents of racial discrimination are often used as evidence in support of a research problem, question or hypothesis.

Critical race theory is supported by structuralism.

For example, by investigating how legislation and cultural influences impact on the demography of a community.

In this respect, micro-aggression is often an element of research making use of a critical race theory perception.

Micro-aggression can be found in any community where a certain group might feel anger and frustration because of the way the perceived or real privileged elite threaten them or because of one or more privileges that they have at the expense of the discriminated or that the discriminated are denied.

This can erupt into riots, crime, or any other form of violence.

And, of course, such micro-aggression can become the topic of research.

Critical race theory can also be linked to critical theory, neoliberalism, feminism, romanticism, humanism, post-colonialism and post-structuralism.

Liberalism is in opposition with some of the values of critical race theory because of the former’s favouritism towards the elite, the rich and the noble.

Critical race theory and structuralism are also in opposition because structuralism promotes positions of power, which can have a detrimental effect on human relationships.

Positivism is also in opposition with critical race theory because positivism favours quantitative research while supporters of critical race theory feel that the analysis of numbers strip human interaction of its affective values.

Critical race theory is not always structured.

Although it often investigates legislation and cultural influences, the process can be aggressive and unstructured.

It can even include riotous advocacy campaigns.

Hidden motives can also be present.

Critical race theory is, unfortunately, sometimes misused to achieve political agendas and to oppress minority or even majority groups that are vulnerable.

Summary

Critical race theory investigates race-related issues.

It objects to institutionalized racial discrimination.

It often studies situations where needs exist because of the unfair treatment of a racial group.

An aggressive, race-conscious approach to transformation can be favoured.

Any field of study making use of any research method can investigate racial discrimination.

However, social studies predominate.

Micro-aggression is often an element of the research making use of critical race theory.

Critical race theory is supported by structuralism, critical theory, neoliberalism, feminism, romanticism, humanism, post-colonialism and post-structuralism.

Critical race theory is opposed by liberalism, structuralism and positivism.

Criticism against critical race theory include that:

It is not always structured.
Hidden motives can be present.
It is sometimes misused.

News

ARTICLE 42: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies: Paradigmatic Approaches

11th Sep 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr Hannes Nel

Introduction

Do you believe that something can be only true or false, right or wrong?

Do you turn your back on people with whom you disagree?

Do you agree with the notion that the truth is often the perception of an individual?

And do you accept that not all people see the truth the same as you do?

I hope my posts on paradigms will convince you that an argument or premise can be true for some but not for others, sometimes true but not always, only partially true, and true in one context but not in a different one.

An introduction to research paradigms

Most paradigms can also be regarded as research methods.

And what we call research methods are often data collection methods.

There are many paradigms, but not all of them can be used as the foundation for research.

Because some paradigms are only concepts that are too dependent on a specific context for the discovery of generalizations.

But even this is not a general rule.

Because your research, not just the paradigm, will sometimes be dependent on a specific context.

Relativism is an example of a paradigm that always applies to a certain context.

Some paradigms are modifications of classical paradigms.

Research paradigms are sometimes also called:

Philosophical perspectives.
Philosophical epochs.
Epistemological approaches.
Discipline matrixes.
Theoretical frameworks.

They represent certain assumptions and perceptions with respect to the nature of the world and how we know it.

A paradigm is a philosophy that includes certain patterns, structures and frameworks or systems.

It is a system of interrelated ontological, epistemological and methodological assumptions.

It includes scientific ideas and values that a group of researchers have in common regarding the nature of research and how it should be conducted.

The paradigm or paradigms that you use will add a philosophical perception to the clinical academic meaning of your research.

It also determines the spirit in which you will do your research.

Different groups of researchers see research differently.

That is why there are many different paradigms to choose from.

You should decide which paradigmatic approach you will follow in your research.

It is possible to adopt more than one paradigm.

You can even follow one paradigmatic approach in one section of your thesis or dissertation and a different one in a different section.

You can even use a paradigm as the foundation of just one argument in your thesis or dissertation.

Just as long as they don’t contradict each other.

And you need to be careful of not damaging the consistency of your arguments by making use of too many paradigms.

This can easily happen if you forget your arguments and stance in an earlier section of your report.

Your philosophical stance informs the research method that you will use and the way in which you will interpret the data that you collect.

By choosing a paradigmatic approach, you commit yourself to a particular stance while rejecting a good number of other possibilities.

This need not be a problem – you can always change your stance later while doing your research.

It can easily happen that you need to change your paradigmatic approach, because your knowledge and understanding will grow as you collect and analyze data.

That is great, because you need to be objective and flexible when you embark on doctoral or master’s degree studies.

Always keep an open mind and be prepared to admit it when you are wrong.

Fortunately, you have a computer that allows you to return to and review previous work as many times as might be necessary.

And you can change your mind without other people knowing it.

This applies to natural science as well as social science.

And obviously then also to quantitative and quantitative research.

You should choose your research paradigm with the research problem, question or hypothesis in mind.

Research paradigms allow for a variety of research methods that can be used.

The choice is not so much about the research method that you will use, but rather about your ontological and epistemological assumptions.

The challenge is to select a paradigm or combination of paradigms that are most suited for solving a research problem, question or hypothesis.

The choice of a research paradigm or paradigms should be made in the context of many and often competing influences.

Your personal preferences and many external variables will also play a role.

Even so, don’t get bogged down in too much soul searching and uncertainty about which paradigm to choose.

Study the paradigms carefully and select one to four that look like they fit in well with what you have in mind.

If you do not decide on a paradigm to follow, you will inevitably follow one that fits in with your personal preferences.

And you will not even know that you are following a paradigm if you don’t know them.

The danger of this is that you might switch around between different paradigms too often, with the result that your arguments might be confusing and perhaps even contradict one another.

This is especially true when you investigate a complex research question or hypothesis.

Consistency, structure and logic are critically important in writing a thesis or dissertation.

You run the risk of destroying those requirements if you don’t follow one or a few paradigms that articulates with your research question or hypothesis.

Using more than one paradigm improves the possibility that the knowledge that you develop will be comprehensive and generalizable.

You should choose your paradigm or paradigms early.

That is, when you structure your research approach and methods.

You can even specify your choice in your research proposal if it is doctoral studies that you are embarking on.

It will show your intent, motivation and expectations for your research.

You will need to make some philosophical assumptions when you decide upon a paradigm or paradigms because it will also impact om the focus of your research.

I need to emphasise, be careful of combining paradigms that are in opposition with one another.

This is necessary because opposing paradigms are often based on different ontological and epistemological assumptions.

They, furthermore, do not share a common vocabulary with shared meanings.

And there is no neutral ground from which to adjudicate the merit of the paradigms or their consequences.

I will point out such possible clashes when we discuss the paradigms individually.

In brief – technicist paradigms are often in opposition with interpretive paradigms while critical paradigms fit in somewhere between the two groups.

Being “in opposition with”; “challenged by”; rejected by”; “associated with”; or “disagree with” does not mean that different paradigms completely differ or disagree.

But rather that they agree or disagree in terms of certain characteristics and elements.

You need to be fully aware of the paradigmatic assumptions that you make.

And you need to consistently move from description to explanation in terms of your findings and conclusions without deviating from your paradigmatic assumptions.

Summary

A paradigm is made up of:

A philosophy.
A system of interrelated ontological, epistemological and methodological assumptions and perceptions.
Scientific ideas and values.

The paradigm or paradigms that you choose for your research:

Determines the spirit in which you will do your research.
Informs the research and data collection methods that you will use.
Adds a philosophical perception to the academic meaning of your research, and
Lends consistency, structure and logic to your thesis or dissertation.

The paradigm that you choose will probably apply to qualitative and social research or quantitative and natural research.

A mixed research approach is also possible.

You can change your paradigmatic approach at any stage during your research.

When choosing a paradigm or paradigms for your research, you should consider:

Your research problem or hypothesis.
The ontological and epistemological assumptions of your research.
The context in which you will conduct your research.
Your personal influences and preferences.
Many external variables that will be relevant to your research topic.

You can achieve coherence in your research process by articulating your research question or hypothesis and your research method to the paradigm or paradigms of your choice.

Don’t spend too much time and effort on trying to find the perfect paradigm for your research.

Close

In closing, it would be almost impossible to discuss all paradigms that you can find in the literature.

Academics do not agree which paradigms should be accepted as such.
Many paradigms overlap and echo the nature and elements of other paradigms.
Not all paradigms can be used as the foundation for research.

If everything goes according to plan, I will discuss the following paradigms separately in the twenty-nine posts following on this one:

Behaviourism.	11. Interpretivism.	21. Pragmatism.
Constructivism.	12. Liberalism.	22. Pre-modernism.
Critical race theory.	13. Modernism.	23. Radicalism.
Critical theory.	14. Neoliberalism.	24. Rationalism.
Empiricism.	15. Phenomenology.	25. Relativism.
Ethnomethodology.	16. Positivism.	26. Romanticism.
Feminism.	17. Post-colonialism.	27. Scientism.
Functionalism.	18. Post-modernism.	28. Structuralism.
Hermeneutics.	19. Post-positivism.	29. Symbolic interactionism.
Humanism.	20. Post-structuralism.

News

ARTICLE 43: Research Methods for Ph. D. Studies: Behaviorism

11th Sep 2020 No Comments

Introduction

Many Baby Boomers will remember the teachers at school who would not allow you to verbally respond to their scolding and reprimands.

“Listen to me and don’t talk back!”, they would say.

The consequence of this was that sometimes, when you had a good reason for behaving in a manner that they did not approve of, you just kept quiet and took your punishment with a stiff upper lip.

Just to set the record straight – I am deeply thankful to every teacher that taught me at school.

They did what they thought was right and they always had the interests of their pupils at heart.

Of course, there were also the difficult teachers, but I was fortunate not to have such a teacher ever.

All right – almost never.

Teachers in those days adopted an exaggerated behavioristic approach towards pupils.

They reacted to what they saw and did not care to think about the reasons why children behaved the way they did.

Hello, my name is Hannes Nel and I will discuss the nature and elements of behaviorism in this article.

Behaviorism

Behaviorism is a set of doctrines that argue that human and animal behavior can be explained in terms of external stimuli, responses, learner history and reinforcement.

Behaviorists argue that the human mind cannot be known.

Therefore, it cannot be shown that human thinking has an effect in the individual’s behavior.

All mental states, including beliefs, values, motives and reasons can only be described, defined and explained in terms of observable behavior.

Any data of a mental kind should be regarded as unscientific.

Reinforcement can increase or decrease the desired behavior.

Thus, reinforcement of behavior can be positive or negative.

All human behavior can be understood in terms of cause and effect.

Therefore, research should focus on that which is determined by and is the product of the environment.

This implies that research should focus on observable behavior which can be objectively measured rather than on cognitive processes which can only be inferred.

Intentionality and purposiveness are excluded or regarded as less important.

Behaviorism is related to positivism because positivism also believes that understanding human behavior can be gained through observation and reason.

Behaviorism can also be associated with empiricism because both make use of experimentation, specifically experimentation with experience and the simulation of experience in research.

Symbolic interactionism is also related to behaviorism because both believe that learning takes place through the interaction between human beings, that is, external stimuli.

Both behaviorism and symbolic interactionism depend on language to convey and share research findings.

Consequently, the accuracy and validity of findings through both behaviorism and symbolic interactionism depend on the ability of the researcher to use language.

So, you might have noticed that behaviorism, positivism, empiricism and symbolic interactionism gain comprehension through the observation of cause and effect.

Here we have the possibility of using different types of paradigms together, because:

Behaviorism, empiricism and symbolic interactionism are predominantly interpretivist paradigms.
Positivism is a predominantly technicist paradigm.

Behaviorism disagrees with phenomenology because phenomenology considers experience through direct interaction while behaviorism takes external stimuli into consideration.

Behaviorism disagrees with constructivism because constructivism claims that understanding is gained through experience and reflection while behaviorism largely neglects the cognitive processes, especially reflection.

The same applies to pragmatism because pragmatism postulates that knowledge is gained through observation and interpretation.

Again, the difference is vested in cognitive processes.

The problem with behaviorism as a research paradigm is that changes in behavior without taking cognitive processes into consideration are often only temporary.

Consequently, it does not deal with subjective, but lasting, human meaning-making.

Some behaviorists, however, do recognize the fact that cognitive thinking and the accompanying emotions can influence behavior.

This would be called radical behaviorism.

A second criticism against behaviorism is that the causes of changes in behavior are not always scientifically corroborated.

Summary

Behaviorism argues that behavior can be explained in terms of external stimuli, responses, learner history and reinforcement.

The human mind cannot be known.

Cognitive processes can only be inferred.

Therefore, all mental states can only be described, defined and explained in terms of observable behavior.

Behavior can be improved or suppressed.

All human behavior can be understood in terms of cause and effect.

Behaviorism is related to positivism, empiricism, and symbolic interactionism.

Behaviorism disagrees with constructivism and pragmatism.

Criticism against behaviorism includes that change without cognitive processes will probably be temporary.

And that the causes of changes in behavior are not always scientifically corroborated.

Close

In closing, There are four ground rules for research that one should meet regardless of which paradigm or paradigms you use.

Firstly, you should not ignore cognitive processes.

Secondly, you should always try to integrate and systemize your findings into a meaningful pattern and theory.

Thirdly, keep in mind that text constructed by human beings is fallible.

Therefore, you must always corroborate your data and findings.

Fourthly, personal preferences can damage the accuracy of your data collection, analysis, conclusions, finding and recommendations.

Despite paradigms not always supporting all four these ground rules, I strongly recommend that you keep them in mind.

News

ARTICLE 29: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Masters Degree Studies: Field Research

25th Aug 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Introduction

Once when I sent out questionnaires for a research project, the CEO of a manufacturing plant collected and worked through the questionnaires completed by his employees.

There were probably 100 to 200 completed questionnaires. He removed all the questionnaires that he felt could put him in a bad spot and sent me the rest.

Of course, I did not use any of them.

I was fortunate that one of his employees phoned and told me what he did.

Field Research

For many researchers, the collection of data involves or at least includes fieldwork.

Not all field research deals with people.

Also, fieldwork is not limited to research in nature only.

Field research can require the use of quantitative or qualitative analysis.

Preparing for field research

You should first refine your research project and develop your data collection instruments before you embark on fieldwork.

This is because your topic and the context in which your research will be done will determine if you should do fieldwork or not.

Where field research will take place

Field research, or fieldwork, means conducting empirical research in real-world settings.

You can do fieldwork in a classroom, observing students or lecturers, in factories, on ships, in aircraft and many more.

Doing fieldwork is not a must for all research.

You will use fieldwork if your research topic demands it if you feel that it will enable you to do accurate and valid research, if your study leader expects it from you, if you can afford it, and if it is something that you will enjoy doing.

The research process

In the spirit of grounded theory, you should be open-minded about the realities that you encounter.

Let the data that you collect lead your thinking processes.

Don’t try to bend what you see and experience to fit your preconceived ideas.

Preconceptions that you should get rid of include personal beliefs and initial theoretical propositions.

It might be necessary to divide your observations into different categories.

Don’t categorize your observations and events prematurely, though.

The first days in the field are often seen as the most challenging and emotionally rewarding.

Meeting a new group of people in their environment, about which you might not know much, can be uncomfortable, perhaps even intimidating.

Remember that such people might not trust you in the beginning.

People are suspicious of the unknown and they may resist you and your research.

Your research will be as intimidating to them as their environment to you.

If your doctoral or master’s degree studies are an extension of your previous studies, you might feel more comfortable with the environment in which you will do research.

Even so, you will probably encounter some new experiences and observations.

Doing site visits is a formally recognized way of doing fieldwork.

Site visits can be the only data collection method that you may use.

However, it is mostly necessary to collect other data as well.

You should be able to develop categories, propositions and eventually meaning based on what you experience and observe in the field.

Participant observation takes place during a site visit and a site visit may include other data collection activities.

Can you see how you can integrate different research methods?

Experimental methods, for example, can fit in well with fieldwork.

An advantage of site visits is that they enable data to be collected from many field settings as part of the same study.

The data from any single setting or site may be limited in terms of quantity, quality and variety.

Studying cross-site patterns might be necessary for comparison, to identify trends or patterns in phenomena or behavior and for corroboration of data.

Not just any field setting will be suitable for research and data collection.

Difference In functions, context, time and size can render some sites irrelevant to your research topic.

It might sometimes be necessary to visit the same site at different times and more than once.

An example of this is where you do research on the effect over time of global warming on glaciers, rivers, vegetation, etc.

Site visits are likely to be more rigid than participant observation.

Site visits usually follow a pre-established schedule, as well as an agenda while you are in the field.

Site visits can be time-consuming and require substantial preparation.

It can also require good timing, for example, if you were to do research on the migration of salmon up rivers to spawn.

Interviewing, conversing with participants, and observing them while they do something that you do research on will also require good planning and timing.

Members of a field setting for interviewing may have helped you to arrange the schedule.

They will probably use the opportunity to schedule the interviews so that it will suit them.

The disadvantage of this is that they can also prepare their responses to your questions in advance, thereby making it artificial and probably not valid.

Their responses may be idealized and what they think you would like to hear.

This is an example of reflexivity.

Reflexivity in this context means that the presence of the researcher affects the people being studied.

The same kind of situation can happen in the case of participant observation.

A further complication arises when you are accompanied by your host during the site visit.

The host may wish to monitor you and see and hear what you learn from his employees.

Paradigmatic approaches that fit well with field research include behaviorism, constructivist, critical race theory, critical theory, functionalism, neoliberalism, positivism, pragmatism, radicalism and scientism.

Summary

Field research can deal with people, phenomena in nature or even history.

It may require qualitative and/or quantitative research.

You will need to do a literature study and decide how you will collect further data first before you will know what kind of field research you should do.

Fieldwork can be done almost anywhere.

You need to be open-minded and objective about the data that you collect through fieldwork.

Also, be prepared to go through a process of mental adjustment. You will need time to grow accustomed to strange people and an unknown environment.

The contextual conditions between participant observation and interviewing are not the same, but both can be damaged by reflexivity.

You can integrate fieldwork with most other research methods.

Fieldwork is not always necessary for all research on especially the doctoral level.

News

ARTICLE 22: Research Methods for Ph. D. and Master’s Degree Studies

20th Aug 2020 No Comments

Written by Dr. Hannes Nel

Introduction

For my first doctoral study, I used a quantitative method, specifically CHAID supported with log-linear analysis and the CATMOD procedure. I chose this statistical method because I intended to send out many questionnaires. I had to ask for the assistance of the statisticians of the South African Council for Human Research to process my completed questionnaires.

Of course, I had to analyze the printouts of the processed data myself, else I would not have been able to come to any conclusions, findings or suggested solutions to my research problem.

In retrospect, I was walking on thin ice by making use of a statistical process about which I knew little.

Most of the methods that I will discuss should be used with qualitative research, although some should preferably be used with quantitative research.

All research methods can be used with a mixed approach.

Quantitative research methods are often dedicated to a specific scientific field of study rather than to a research method.

They sometimes also deviate from the generally accepted structure of a dissertation or thesis.

Research methods overlap with research paradigms and data collection methods. I will discuss them separately in future posts.

Mixed research methods

Research on the doctoral and master’s degree levels is becoming increasingly diverse and inclusive of both qualitative and quantitative research methods.

That is one of the reasons why a mixed-method approach is often followed.

Another reason why students decide to follow a mixed-method approach is that they feel that a combination provides a better understanding of a research problem than just focusing on qualitative or quantitative research methods.

Some students argue that a mixed-method enhances the validity and accuracy of data and the relevance and value of research findings.

The overarching premise is that the integration of two or more methods should facilitate the achievement of research objectives.

The decision of whether to integrate multiple methods depends on a combination of the research objectives, the resources and time available, your philosophical assumptions, your knowledge of research methods and your style or personal preferences. The people who will read your dissertation or thesis, especially your sponsor, but also your study leader, will also have an influence on which research method or methods you will use.

Different methods can be used as a form of triangulation in the hope that the findings from the different methods will corroborate one another.

Where will you discuss the research method that you will use?

You will probably discuss the research method that you will use in the second chapter of your dissertation or thesis.

You should explain:

The method that you will use without trying to “teach” your study leader or other readers the intricacies of research. They probably know more about this than you.
Why you chose the method.
The reason why you chose the method.

You should also provide a detailed description of the components of the methodology of your choice. I will discuss the components of different research methods in future posts, seeing that they differ for different research methods.

The method that you choose must enable you to progress from a problem situation to a solution.

As far as possible you should do as much of the work as possible on your own.

For my second doctoral study, I used Atlas.Ti to code and analyze the data that I collected, mostly through interviewing. I used grounded theory, which is a qualitative research method. This time around I attended a short course on Atlas.Ti at the University of Guildford in Surrey before embarking on my studies, so that I could do all the work on my own.

Your method or methods can consist of a combination of literature study, models, arguments, mathematical proofs, surveys, case studies, experimentation, etc.

Did you notice that I am integrating research methods with data collection methods here?

The chapter on your research methods is mostly not difficult to write.

After all, you will have all the information from a book or books that you consulted.

Even better, your study leader can suggest a method that will work well with the nature of your research.

In addition to the purpose of your research, you should also consider your knowledge, experience, strong points, weak points and the data that you will have access to.

Don’t choose a quantitative method if you feel uncomfortable with calculations and statistics or if you do not have access to laboratories or other scientific equipment that you will need.

Don’t choose a qualitative method if you will not have access to or feel comfortable with people as your target group.

Summary

You will probably use quantitative research methods if you feel comfortable with figures and statistics, if you have access to the laboratories or other scientific equipment that you will need for your research and if the topic of your research is such that it can be investigated quantitatively.

You will probably use qualitative research methods if you feel comfortable when working with people when the topic of your research is suitable for qualitative research and if you need to solve immediate social or community problems.

You will probably use mixed research methods if there is a need to collect and analyze quantitative and qualitative data.

You can use more than one research method, and some of them might be quantitative while others are qualitative in nature. Different methods can be used as a form of triangulation, which should give you a measure of corroboration of your data and findings.

Keep in mind that research methods, paradigms, data collection methods and data analysis methods are all parts of the research process.

You will probably discuss the research method that you will follow in the second chapter of your dissertation or thesis. Although it is an important chapter, you should not go into too much detail.

« Previous 1 2 3