DEMYSTIFYING PHILOSOPHIES AND PARADIGMS UNDERPINNING SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
Abstract
The main objective of this study was to demystify the philosophical paradigms so as to improve our understanding of research, especially for the Ph.D students and researchers and to appreciate how our personal thoughts and beliefs can be able to influence our research design, outcomes and interpretation. The research design employed in this study was descriptive. This study relied heavily on secondary data as is the case with most desktop research study. The study reviewed journal articles, unpublished papers and conference papers on understanding of research philosophies and paradigms. The study employed a desktop approach to provide answers to the research objectives. Specifically, the paper used content analysis to gather information from peer reviewed publications such as, journal articles, environmental organizations reports and books. The study found that for positivists the research approaches are quantitative and include experimental, quasi-experimental, correlational, causal comparative, and survey designs. Interpretivists are subjective in the way they view the world and adopts qualitative research designs and that Pragmatism go hand in hand with realism as an epistemological position. This study recommended that it is important for researchers to plan their research studies and put into consideration the philosophical concepts, positions and traditions underpinning every research method and methodological approach. The selection of research approaches must also be based on the nature of the research problem or issue being addressed, the researchers’ personal experiences, and the audiences for the study. Informing this decision should be the philosophical assumptions the researcher brings to the study; procedures of inquiry (called research designs); and specific research methods of data collection, analysis, and interpretation. It is important for the researcher to be rational and not emotional in the understandings of the philosophical underpinnings of his/her research as this allows for empirical verification of their observations and inferences and provides rigor and authenticity to the research process.
Key Words: Research Methodologies, Techniques, Research Paradigms, Philosophies, Research Design
CITATION: Panya, K. O., & Nyarwath, O. (2022). Demystifying philosophies and paradigms underpinning scientific research. The Strategic Journal of Business & Change Management, 9 (4), 1367 – 1382.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Cooper &schilder S. (2003), Human Resource Development, 3rd Edition, DB Publishers Great Britain.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage,
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: meaning and perspective in the research process. London, UK: Sage.
Cumming B., (2012). Revisiting Philosophical and Theoretical Debates in Contemporary Educational Research and Major Epistemological and Ontological Underpinnings.
Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (2000). Handbook of qualitative research. Sage, London: Sage
Dewey, J. (1931).The development of American pragmatism. In H. S. Thayer (Ed.) (1989), Pragmatism: The classic writings (pp. 23-40). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett. 1931
Hashil A., (2014).Demystifying Ontology and Epistemology in research methods .Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260244813
James, W.,.(1907). Pragmatism, a New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking, Popular Lectures. 1907. KUHN, Thomas S.(1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions Vol. 1962
James, W. (2000). What pragmatism means. In J. J. Stuhr (Eds.), Pragmatism and classical American philosophy: Essential readings and interpretive essays. (pp. 193-202). New York.
Kaushik., V.,& Walsh.,C.,(2019). Pragmatism as a Research Paradigm and Its Implications for Social Work Research. Faculty of Social Work, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada Correspondence: vkaushik@ucalgary.ca
Keeves, J. P. (1997). Educational research methodology and measurement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kivunja, C. & Kuyini, A. B. (2017). Understanding and applying research paradigms in educational contexts. International Journal of Higher Education, 6 ( 5), 26-41.
Kothari, C.R. (2002) “Research Methodology: Methods & Techniques” 2nd Edition. New Delhi: K.K. Gupta..
Krishna Kumar Khatri.,K.,K.,(2020). Research Paradigm: A Philosophy of Educational Research. International Journal of English Literature and Social Sciences, 5(5) Sep-Oct 2020 |Available online: https://ijels.com/ ISSN: 2456-7620 https://dx.doi.org/10.22161/ijels.55.15 1435
Kirongo A. C. & Otieno.,C.,O.,(2020). Research Philosophy Design and Methodologies: A Systematic Review of Research Paradigms in Information Technology. www.globalscientificjournal.com.GSJ: Volume 8, Issue 5, May 2020, Online: ISSN 2320-9186. GSJ: Volume 8, Issue 5, May 2020 ISSN 2320-9186
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Lincoln, Yvonne, Susan A. Lynham, and Egon G. Guba. 2011. Paradigms and perspectives in contention. In The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. Edited by Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, pp. 91–95.
Maarouf.,H.,(2019). Pragmatism as a Supportive Paradigm for the Mixed Research Approach: Conceptualizing the Ontological, Epistemological, and Axiological Stances of Pragmatism. doi:10.5539/ibr.v12n9p1 URL: https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v12n9p1 International Business Research; Vol. 12, No. 9; 2019 ISSN 1913-9004 E-ISSN 1913-9012 Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
Mack L., (2010). The Philosophical Underpinnings of Educational Research. Polyglossia journals, Volume 19, October 2010
Marendi, P., N., Ngugi P., K., Bolo, A., Z., & Ondieki F., M. (2015). Public Procurement Legal Framework Implementation and Performance of State Corporations in Kenya. (A Doctoral dissertation, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, 2015).
Mauthner.,N.,S.,(2020). Research philosophies and why they matter. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340268223 Chapter · January 2020 DOI: 10.4337/9781788975636.00018
Maxcy, S.J. (2003). Pragmatic threads in mixed methods research in the social sciences: The search for multiple modes of inquiry and the end of the philosophy of formalism. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences. (pp. 51-89). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Moreno, J. (1947). Contribution of sociometry to research methodology in sociology. American Sociological Review, 12(6), 287 – 292.
Morgan, David L. 2014a. Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: A Pragmatic Approach. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Morgan, D. L. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Molina-Azorin, J. F. (2016). Mixed methods research: An opportunity to improve our studies and our research skills. European Journal of Management and Business Economics, 25, 37-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.redeen.2016.05.001
Mugenda, O. and Mugenda, A. (2003).Research Methods, Quantitative and Qualitative
Approaches. Nairobi: ACTS.
Parvaiz , Mufti.,O., Wahab.,M.,(2016). Pragmatism for Mixed Method Research at Higher Education Level Gohar Saleem. Business & Economic Review: Vol. 8, Issue 2: 2016 pp. 67-79
Rorty, Richard, (1980). Pragmatism, relativism and irrationalism. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 53: 719–38. [CrossRef]
Rorty, Richard,(2000). Philosophy and Social Hope. London: Penguin Books.
Scott, D. & Usher, R. (Eds) (1996). Understanding educational research. London, UK: Routledge.
Silva.,C.,C.,H., Siqueira.,O.,A., Araújo.,A.,M., & Dornelas.,S.,J.,(2018). Let's be Pragmatic: Research in Information Systems with Relevance and Rigor. International Journal of Business Management and Economic Research (IJBMER), Vol 9(4),2018, 1314-1321
Singh D., (2019). Understanding philosophical underpinnings of research with respect to various paradigms: Perspective of a research scholar. Conference Paper, Ambedkar University Delhi.
Snape, D., & Spencer, L. (2003). The foundations of qualitative research In J. Richie & J. Lewis (Eds.), Qualitative Research Practice (pp. 1-23). Los Angeles: Sage.
Tuli, F. (2010). The basis of distinction between quantitative and qualitative in social science: reflection on ontological, epistemological and methodological perspectives. Ethiop. Journal of education and science, 6 (1), pp. 97-108.
Turyahikayo, E. (2021). Philosophical paradigms as the bases for knowledge management research and practice. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 13(2), 209–224. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2021.13.012
Tombs.,M.,& Pugsley.,L., (2020).Understand Research Philosophies and Paradigms in Medical Education. Why Focus on Philosophy and Paradigms? Centre for Medical Education (C4ME) School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Neuadd Meirionnydd, Heath Park, Cardiff CF14 4YS Tel: +44(0)29 2068 7451 E-mail: medicaleducation@cardiff.ac.uk ISBN: 978-1-907019-92-0
Venkatesh, Viswanath; Brown, Susan A.; Bala, Hillol.(2013). Bridging the qualitative-quantitative divide: Guidelines for conducting mixed methods research in information systems. MIS quarterly, v. 37, n. 1, 2013.
Walsham, Geoff. (2006).Doing interpretive research. European journal of information systems, v. 15, n. 3, p. 320-330, 2006
Watson, T. (2011) ‘Ethnography, reality and truth: The vital need for studies of “how things work” in organizations and management’, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 48, No. 1, pp. 202–17
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.61426/sjbcm.v9i4.2498
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
PAST ISSUES:
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.