Assumptions and Methods of Interpretist and Positivist Approaches - Essay Example

Oftentimes, the assumptions of what makes valid research differ from one method to another. These assumptions are described by epistemological concepts, providing notions and theories on knowledge and how it can be obtained. It is expected of all researchers that they have a profound understanding of the basis of their knowledge, particularly the authenticity and extent of the knowledge that they acquired. This paper will provide a comprehensive outline of the assumptions of positivist and interpretive research and attempt to describe how these two approaches may draw the most valid and sound knowledge from research activity.
Assumptions of a Positivist Approach
The positivist approach in research is founded on the knowledge obtained from the positive corroboration of experiences that can be observed and evaluated against empirical methods, as opposed to mere instinct or perfection. This approach to research is very common in science and can be done through experiments or scientific methods. The Positivist Approach holds the following assumptions:
1. There is an objective reality. Knowledge can be obtained not by mere intuitions but through a series of experiments and scientific activity (Myers, 2008). All knowledge should only be regarded as veracious, true, and valid if they have been evaluated against empirical methods such that all knowledge should be observable. This is one part of a positivist approach that links it to empiricism. In addition, this is also to say that social reality is actual and something that is not formed by imaginative thinking or presentiments. It holds the assumption that reality is something that can be tested and is self-autonomous of theoretical description.
2. Researcher should be objective and impartial. It is often true that in conducting research, a personal point of view would always influence the inferences arrived at in findings (Myers, 2008). However, positivism assumes that if a researcher maintains his or her objectivity in the research, especially in looking at the results and as reflected on the literary contexts of the research topic at hand, it is almost always certain that the knowledge obtained is valid and trustworthy.
3. Scientific research must have proper propositions, experimental measures of variables, and theories that can be verified free of comprehension of meanings and purposes.
It is very important that research must have a clear-cut proposal detailing the overall objectives of the research (Myers, 2008). Also, these propositions should be measurable and should be provided with operational definitions that would help in arriving at the most scientific results. Furthermore, theories and hypothetical propositions should be free of subjective inclinations such that they should all be subject to empirical approaches to verifying research.

4. The researcher should only act as an observer of the matters of the study
The researcher should be able to demonstrate neutrality and transparency in the obtainment of knowledge. This is oftentimes the cause of inaccurate findings in that some researchers tend to intrude on the results with their slanted observation and belief of the knowledge obtained (Myers, 2008). Research is most valid when subjectivity is not at all present in all phases of the research activity.
Assumptions of Interpretive Research
Interpretive Research can be described as bending fully on qualitative as opposed to the quality of research. It places the “meaning-making practices of human actors” at the core of the scientific explanation (Institute of Public and International Affairs, 2009). This type of research approach is carried out from a “near-experience perspective” wherein the researcher bends more on the sense of the research practice while demonstrating how those practices produce results that can be physically observed (Institute of Public and International Affairs, 2009). Below is an outline of the assumptions of the interpretive research approach:
1. Social reality is socially constructed. This approach contends that knowledge is fashioned by the various elements of society which includes our own interpretation of things, philosophical perspectives, and the notions that come out of our individual cultural influences (Myers, 2008). Unlike the positivist approach, this approach is more concerned with the meaning of the knowledge rather than purely observing the outcome of the research. It tends to appreciate the quality of the knowledge being produced instead of directly measuring them as objects for the conclusion.
2. Theories are only rebuilding predating facts; nothing is new. A good theory is something that understands the quality or meaning of the facts.
Interpretive research argues that social knowledge is not original; everything is a reconstruction of previous knowledge; and instead of deeming the supposed “new” knowledge per se, it is more beneficial to understand their implications or their meanings.
3. In the natural sciences, meanings are detached from facts; in social science, meanings are what make the facts.
It is expected for science that knowledge should be evaluated against empirical methods which are why the natural sciences are heavily employed with positivist methods of research (Myers, 2008). In contrast, social sciences are more concerned with the quality of knowledge, whether or not they make sense; whether or not they provide meaning to the study.