Remember that these paradigms are not clear-cut and much of the best research takes place on the borders between them (note: positivism and interpretivism cannot be used together).
Different disciplinary perspectives draw from similar ontological and epistemological roots and share similar foundational assumptions, thereby rendering blurry the often sharp distinction between disciplines made in academia.
◥ University. {q} PhD. {tr} Training. {R} Paradigms. Paradigm. In science and philosophy, a paradigm /ˈpærədaɪm/ is a distinct set of concepts or thought patterns, including theories, research methods, postulates, and standards for what constitutes legitimate contributions to a field. Etymology[edit] Paradigm comes from Greek παράδειγμα (paradeigma), "pattern, example, sample"[1] from the verb παραδείκνυμι (paradeiknumi), "exhibit, represent, expose"[2] and that from παρά (para), "beside, beyond"[3] and δείκνυμι (deiknumi), "to show, to point out".[4] In rhetoric, paradeigma is known as a type of proof.
The purpose of paradeigma is to provide an audience with an illustration of similar occurrences. This illustration is not meant to take the audience to a conclusion, however it is used to help guide them there. A personal accountant is a good comparison of paradeigma to explain how it is meant to guide the audience. Scientific paradigm[edit] An example of a currently accepted paradigm would be the standard model of physics. Paradigm shifts[edit] Paradigm shift. A paradigm shift (or revolutionary science) is, according to Thomas Kuhn, in his influential book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), a change in the basic assumptions, or paradigms, within the ruling theory of science. It is in contrast to his idea of normal science. According to Kuhn, "A paradigm is what members of a scientific community, and they alone, share" (The Essential Tension, 1977). Unlike a normal scientist, Kuhn held, "a student in the humanities has constantly before him a number of competing and incommensurable solutions to these problems, solutions that he must ultimately examine for himself" (The Structure of Scientific Revolutions).
Kuhnian paradigm shifts[edit] Kuhn used the duck-rabbit optical illusion to demonstrate the way in which a paradigm shift could cause one to see the same information in an entirely different way. Science and paradigm shift[edit] Examples of paradigm shifts[edit] Natural sciences[edit] Social sciences[edit] Marketing[edit] M. (Pat Cryer) Qualitative versus Quantitative Research. Before getting to grips with qualitative versus quantitative research, there are a few basic ideas that need to be understood. So do read the next few sections carefully. The nature of 'truth' Research should be about discovering 'truth' - but what exactly is 'truth'? It often depends on how one looks at things - see the following box. Common idioms which illustrate how there are (at least) two sides to most viewpoints One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter.
One person's meat is another person's poison. One person's junk is another person's antique. One person’s vice is another person's virtue. One person's security is another person's prison. One person's blessing is another person's curse. It is therefore important as a researcher to understand how you are looking at your research and to be able to explain this to others who need to know about your research. Research paradigms and frameworks Quite generally a way of looking at the world is known as a 'paradigm' . © Pat Cryer. What is your paradigm? Time to spend on this section: 2.5 hours Across disciplines (and within) there are varying views of what research is and how this relates to the kind of knowledge being developed.
Paradigms guide how we make decisions and carry out research. Lawyers, for example, will use an adversarial paradigm while selection committees will use a judgemental paradigm (Guba 1990). Your own discipline will also be guided by a paradigm and through the research papers you read in your subject, you will begin to identify, through the methodology the kind of paradigm that is used. As a researcher, it is important to know where your discipline belongs, that there are different ways of viewing the world and that your approach to knowledge is one of many. The following concepts, in boxes, illustrate some of the different approaches to research. According to Guba (1990), paradigms can be characterised through their: ontology (What is reality?)
Then click on the 'Feedback button' to see how you score. RWJF - Qualitative Research Guidelines Project | Philosophical Tension | Common Paradigms. Qualitative and Quantitative Methods 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. Methodology - how we gain knowledge about the world or "an articulated, theoretically informed approach to the production of data" (Ellen, 1984, p. 9). Five Common Paradigms Most qualitative research emerges from the 'interpretivist' paradigm. Assumptions and beliefs of the Interpretivist paradigm Assumptions and beliefs of the Positivist paradigm. ☢️ Positivism. Critical realism (philosophy of the social sciences) Critical realism is a philosophical approach associated with Roy Bhaskar that combines a general philosophy of science (transcendental realism) with a philosophy of social science (critical naturalism) to describe an interface between the natural and social worlds.
Bhaskar developed a general philosophy of science that he described as transcendental realism, and a special philosophy of the human sciences that he called critical naturalism. The two terms were combined by other authors to form the umbrella term critical realism. Transcendental realism attempts to establish that in order for scientific investigation to take place, the object of that investigation must have real, manipulable, internal mechanisms that can be actualised to produce particular outcomes. This is what we do when we conduct experiments. This stands in contrast to empiricist scientists' claim that all scientists can do is observe the relationship between cause and effect and impose meaning.
Antipositivism / Interpretivism. Antipositivism (also known as interpretivism or negativism) is the belief in social science that the social realm may not be subject to the same methods of investigation as the natural world; that academics must reject[need quotation to verify] empiricism[dubious ] and the scientific method in the conduct of social research. Antipositivists hold that researchers should focus on understanding the interpretations that social actions have for the people being studied.[1][need quotation to verify] Concept[edit] In the early 19th century various intellectuals, perhaps most notably the Hegelians, began to question the prospect of empirical social analysis. Karl Marx died before the establishment of formal social science but nonetheless fiercely rejected Comtean sociological positivism—despite himself attempting to establish a historical materialist "science of society".[2] Frankfurt School[edit] See also[edit] References[edit] Jump up ^ Gerber, John J.