Comparing and Contracting between Interpretivism and Positivism - Essay Example

Positivism emerged due to the rejection of metaphysics concepts, for example, god. Sociologists then found it difficult to explain concepts and neither could they prove and test these ideas; therefore, they saw the need of looking for alternative ideas. Moreover, they felt that social science should be as objective and verifiable as other subjects; thus, they came up with positivism as an alternative to metaphysics (Anderson, 2004; p. 142). Therefore, positivism was applied to describe social phenomenon but did not dig deep into what was unlikely to be known or those phenomena that were considered to be beyond the scope of social science. The positivists concluded that research work could be analyzed and concluded only from what is observable. Therefore, according to positivism, what could be seen and measured from the subject matter under study. Notably, positivism can find its application in research marketing in that some phenomena of marketing can only be measured and analyzed through observation (Browne, 2006; p. 400). For instance, observation is sometimes vital in measuring the trend in some market activity from which conclusions can be made on the best marketing practices to be incorporated to increase such marketing activities.

On the other hand, Interpretivism emerged because scientists felt that human beings were never puppets to respond to stimuli in a certain defined or prescribed manner. They defined human beings as purposeful and active: thus, they were expected to react to stimuli differently depending on their means of interaction and interpretation (Belk, 2006; p. 157). Moreover, they define human beings as objects having power and intent to interpret actions; therefore, they were capable to construct actions taking place within their surroundings as opposed to being mere spectators to the events taking place about them (Browne, 2006; p. 400). The interpretivism stressed on the thinking, behaviors, and intentions of human beings compared to the work done on the same subject by the positivists. Hence, interpretivism lead to conclusions that were highly realistic and more valid. Interpretivism stressed the concern of sharing consciousness since they considered the brain to be a factor affecting many concepts in society.

It is apparent that in conducting marking search markets or better, interpretivism requires that the activities under the study must be consulted with the people or market being surveyed. In other words, they require the involvement of the people within the markets being studied. This can only be achieved by conducting interviews (Decrop, 2006; p. 172).  Conducting interviews is qualitative compared to observation since people will be interviewed and they will present their different views and expectation of their market. Therefore, it is certain to say that Interpretivism is a more qualitative research method compared to positivism that may be considered quantitative (Browne, 2006; p. 400). Furthermore, positivism is based much on assumption thereby the accuracy and quality of data on the targeted people or markets to be influenced by the study may jeopardize unlike the case of Interpretivism where the required information is directly given. Therefore, valuable data can only be obtained through Interpretivism research methods but not through positivism research methods. Despite the differences between Interpretivism and Positivism both are good survey methods in studying social changes and demands of people.