Qualitative and quantitative approaches are rooted in philosophical traditions with different epistemological and ontological assumptions. Epistemology-is the theory of knowledge and the assumptions and beliefs that we have about the nature of knowledge. How do we know the world? What is the relationship between the inquirer and the known? Ontology-concerns the philosphy of existence and the assumptions and beliefs that we hold about the nature of being and existence. Paradigms-models or frameworks that are derived from a worldview or belief system about the nature of knowledge and existence. Paradigms are shared by a scientific community and guide how a community of researchers act with regard to inquiry.
Download Free PDF View PDF
The paradigms of inquiry can be distinguished through their ontology, epistemology, and methodology. These paradigms of inquiry ensure different interpretations on theory. Positivism and post-positivism see theory as an indication or statement of relationships between abstract ideas with empirical observations that identify hypotheses via reliable tests. Alternatively, in order to emphasize the connection between interpretation and the phenomenon under investigation, critical theory, constructivist and participatory paradigms, use interpretive perspectives of theory. Paradigms of inquiry, methodology and method, are not only related and affect each other in the research process, but also develop the rigour of research thorough reliability, validity, generalization in positivism and trustworthiness, validity, and reflexivity in phenomenology. Reaching knowledge through different structural processes provides researchers access to the social world and thus reaches specific conclusions that can be passed on to others for further understanding.
Download Free PDF View PDF
Journal of Research in Nursing
Although using a combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches is widely advocated, there is considerable scope for confusion due to the complex ontological and epistemological issues that need to be resolved. This paper examines some of the issues that may arise when the methods are combined. Three distinct standpoints with regard to using mixed method approaches are highlighted: a methodological purist position, a pragmatic standpoint and an anti-conflationist position. It is suggest that an anti-conflationist approach that is underpinned by the philosophy of critical realism is compatible with all three of the purposes of methodological triangulation identified by Risjord and his co-authors (Risjord et al., 2001, 2002) and that adopting a critical realist perspective may circumvent many of the problems that are associated with paradigm ‘switching’. The case for adopting a critical realist framework is illustrated by a case study, in which a combination of quantitative an.
Download Free PDF View PDF
Download Free PDF View PDF
Download Free PDF View PDF
Download Free PDF View PDF
The goal of this study is to deconstruct the meanings of the terms " quantitative " and " qualitative " , usually used to characterize scientific research method, or to try to undo what seems to be a mistake: the denomination and division of quantitative or qualitative research methods. We consider that this division confuses and impoverishes the conception of knowledge or science. There are many methodological questions so plural, conflicting or not, according to the meaning of the investigated reality which, after all, is what should be discussed from the beginning to the end of the research. We add the theoretical or ideological designation of method to this discussion that for us represents another version of the same problem. To accomplish this goal, we discuss a view of science and a conception of thought.
Download Free PDF View PDF
The importance and meanings of the contemporary debate on quantitative and qualitative methods in social sciences and management research comes out from the fact that the participants defend their ideas in the name of science. Discussions take place at different levels, from basic epistemological topics to current decisions and evaluations of scientific communities. They involve subjects about what is science and what is a scientific theory and about what are the functions of quantitative and qualitative methods and what aspects of social world can be captured by each of them. The paper will focuss on the philosophical conceptual background of the debate and it will point out that the main concepts are considered in different ways: there are different notions of science and scientific theories; quantitative methods are defined some times as non-numerical methods and some times as interpretative methods of the meanings and purposes of social actors; finally quantitative methods include measurements, mathematical models and statistical inferences, which have different basics and rules. The first part of the paper will present a short historical overview on science and method. It will comment the geometry of Euclides and the Aristotelian physics, the legitimation of quantitative methods in the scientific revolution by Galileo and the mathematical physics of Newton; the qualitative approaches of Linnaeus and Darwin; the introduction of new scales of measurement and the creation of statistics; and the positivism of August Comte. The second part of the paper will introduce the contemporary debate on positivist and interpretativist methods. It will comment the evolution of positivism, and interpretativist approaches to the science of history; the phenomenological and hermeneutical justifications of interpretative methods in sociology; the criticism of measurement theory, the structuralist methods of the French school and the legitimation of narratives in social sciences research. That background will facilitate the development of further research about the debate. Key words: Positivist, classificatory and interpretative methods; and epistemology of science.
Download Free PDF View PDF
In this book, ten doctoral students share and discuss a number of metho- dological concerns they have faced in the process of doing research. In the first part, “Capturing the field,” the contributors grapple over issues regarding how to define and demarcate the field of research, for instance in studies on immigrant organizations, red light districts on the Internet, and telephone interviewing. In the second part, “Relations in the field,” the authors deal with methodological concerns regarding the relation- ship between the researcher and the researched, adressing for example research on disabled people, children, and people with HIV and AIDS. The third and final part, “Theory as methodology” contains contributions that emphasize methodological implications resulting from theoretical choices, such as the concepts of culture and discourse. This book is the outcome of the course Qualitative Methods offered as an interdisciplinary course within the PhD programme in the social science.
Download Free PDF View PDF
