Ways of Viewing the World Shape and Ways of Researching The World - Literature review Example

Different ways of viewing the world shape different ways of researching the world Introduction According to Weber (1968), sociology is the science that seeks to give interpretive understanding of the actions that take place in our social settings in order for people to interpret their courses and effects. Social research involves collecting, exploring and reporting information about human beings and their societies. It is about social human beings; their interactions, behaviours and actions and how they relate with an in their world. Crotty (2003) says that “sociology locates the study of society in the context of human being acting and interacting” (p. 68). Several issues guide inquiry or research in the social world; the philosophical underpinning, theoretical perspective, methodology and methods used. One of the most important elements of every research is the theoretical perspective of that research. Theoretical perspective is the way people view their world, the way every researcher views the world in which he carries his inquiry. Thus the methodology used in research and the methods used in data collection and analysis are guided by the theoretical perspective. This paper discusses the different ways of looking at the world which result in different ways of researching the world. The differences in researching methods do not necessarily result to different results especially where precision and accuracy is achieved. Discussion Different ways of looking at the world shape the different ways of researching the world. The perspective taken informs the methodology and the methods taken to research and arrive at answers. Different methods require different analysis and interpretation but all are guided by the perspective taken in looking at the world by those researching that particular world. One issue that must always be addressed in order to enhance accuracy is researcher bias which is mainly as a result of personal opinions overriding what are the actual occurrences. Theoretical perspective is the philosophical position the methodology is laid on. According to Crotty (2003, p. 66), “the theoretical perspective provides a context for the process involved and as a basis for its logic and its criteria.” This means that behind every methodology, there are assumptions buried within it. The assumptions make up the theoretical perspective which is determined by the world which the methodology encompasses. Thus Crotty’s (2003) position that “different ways of viewing the world shape different ways of researching the world” (p. 66). Getting to glimpse with this position allows one to examine the kind of methodology that is appropriate to an area of research and be sure of the combination of methods that agree with the chosen theoretical perspective. Theoretical perspectives have been referred to as paradigms. Since their introduction by Thomas Kuhn, the notions of paradigm, revolutionary science and paradigm shifts have become influentially used in humanistic scholarship as well as in social sciences, (Jensen and Neuman 2013). Kuhn (1970) describes paradigms as fundamental points of views used to characterise science; be it social science or otherwise. Taylor, Kermode and Roberts (2007) define a paradigm as a broad view or perspective of something. Theoretical perspectives are defined as patterns of beliefs and practices that regulate inquiry within a discipline by providing lenses, frames and processes through which investigation is accomplished. A paradigm or a theoretical perspective helps clarify both the methodological choices and structure of inquiry. The term theoretical perspective alludes to how one views their world. This means our view of the world and the kind of social life that goes on in that world where we draw our assumptions. Theoretical perspectives are guided by the philosophical underpinning which explains the beliefs of those perspectives. Some of the major philosophical underpinning includes epistemology and ontology. Ontology is concerned with the philosophy of reality. Epistemology refers to “the theory of knowledge embedded in the theoretical perspective and thereby in the methodology” (Crotty, 2003). According to Trochim (2000), epistemology means the philosophy of knowledge and the way in which we get to know the reality. Epistemology helps a researcher to find out his relationship with the area of inquiry, how he got to know what he knows and the issues that count as knowledge. The four major elements of research inform each other; epistemology informs the theoretical perspective, which in turn informs the methodology chosen and the methods that will be used. Methodology is design, process or the plan of action that informs the choice of methods “and links the choice and the use of the methods to the desired outcomes. Methods are the procedures or techniques used to collect and analyse data needed for the research. In social research, there are several theoretical perspectives which include; positivism and post-post positivism, constructionism, interpretivivism (symbolic interaction, phenomenology, and hermeneutics) Critical inquiry, feminism, post-modernism. Dobson (2002) says that the theoretical perspective of the researcher plays a big role in deciding on the methods to use in the research. Positivist view is based on the belief of an objective reality, studies variables and seeks to explain whether there are causal relationships between the variables and if there are, it seeks to explain them. The positivist perspective encompasses the self proclaimed age of reason and the spirit of enlightenment (Crotty, 2003). According to Goduka (2012) says that the positivist approach concerns itself with “investigating phenomena that are de-contextualised, observable and measured using objective methods” (p. 123). It is important to ask several questions. First, is there only one way of viewing the world, doing research and producing knowledge? Positivism is consistent with quantitative research methodology and the methods used for data collection should agree with the view. All research is done on the assumptions of what a valid research constitutes of and the methods that are more likely to facilitate the acquisition of the knowledge the research tries to acquire. Therefore, each research shows what its assumptions are a research design is an outline or a blueprint that a researcher uses in conducting a study such that he has maximum control over the factors that could interfere with the legitimacy of the research results. In the positivist view, what is being studied is independent of the researcher; we discover knowledge through direct observation or measurements on the phenomena being studied (Krauss 2005). Objectivism is “the notion that truth and meaning reside in their objects independently of any consciousness” (Crotty, 2003, p. 42). Goduka (2012) observes that the objectivistic world view believes in the “existence of objective, absolute and unconditional truth that exists independent of the knower” (p. 4). In the objectivist view, the kind of objective meaning a statement is derived from universal truth and carrying out research is about knowing the truth. According to Goduka (2012) objectivism assumes that a real world exists which consist entities which are structured in accordance with their relations and properties. This view also assumes that human beings come up with abstract symbols which depict nature. Johassen (1992) opine that the world exists objectively and is independent of the human mind and thus external to the knower. This means that from an objectivist perspective social phenomena is made up of distinct objects that have properties that are independent of the observer. This means that if two observers have different interpretations of a phenomena, the problems is with them and it can be solved through further inquiry. Different ways of viewing the world shape different ways of researching the world. Even with the most concrete of things like a tree. A tree may bear different connotations for different people and different settings. Constructionism provides that people construct meaning in the world in which they live in. Constructivism assumes that the knowledge that exists is not independent of the learner or researcher. Their interpretations of different life’s events are different and thus different meanings. The world holds meaning according the way we interpret it. The reason why constructionism differs from subjectivism is that although objects are made and not found, the agreed means of making those objects are social and conventional, not individual and subjective. Crotty (2003) provides a long description of what constructionism is; “the view that all knowledge, and therefore all meaningful reality as such, is contingent upon human practices being constructed in and out of interaction between human beings and their world, and developed and transmitted within an essentially social context” (p. 42). In the constructionist vies, meaning is constructed rather than being discovered. In a way, constructionism wants us to accept the world we live in before we experience it. The constructionist or the naturalistic view is built on the foundation that “knowledge is established through the means attached to the phenomena studied; researchers interact with the subjects of the study to obtain data; researcher changes both researcher and subject and knowledge is context and time dependent” (Krauss 2005, p. 759) Interpretivism assumes that everyone views his/her social world through the lenses the culture has given him/her. Interpretations of the world are guided by the king of meanings our culture has bestowed on us. The interpretive approach takes an individual and his action as the basic foundation. Interpretivist world view or theoretical perspectives assume that there are multiple realities. According to Goduka (2012) all knowledge is considered as relative to the knower. Therefore Interpretivists work along with others as they make sense of and draw meaning from a phenomena, thereby creating their own meaning and realities in a so that they understand the points of views of others and interpret the experience according to their knowledge. What is meaningful comes from the data collected and the major focus of the researcher is to understand the interpretations and meanings of social actors according to their points of view. In a way, this perspective is inductive. Post-positivism came in to challenge the positivist notion of absolute truth of knowledge. In the post-positivism view, social scientists cannot claim to be positive about knowledge when looking at the actions and behaviours of human beings. Post-positivists use the philosophy of critical realism; which posits that there is error in all observations and that theory is revisable. Critical inquiry seeks to know the reality with certainty. The positivists seek to know uncover the truth, but the post-positivist holds to goal of getting it right bout reality. According to Goduka (2012) this view holds that real structures exist independently of human consciousness but that knowledge is socially created and our knowledge of reality is a result of social conditioning. As paradigms keep changing, a more modern perspective is realism. Realism involves both positivism and constructivism. According to Kraus (2005), it is also referred to as neopostpositivism or post positivism. Realism involves several perceptions about a single reality that is independent of the mind. Realism is value cognizant unlike in positive research which is value free or the interpretive research which is value-laden. Realism is conscious of values of research and of human systems (Krauss 2005). One interesting aspect of realism is that a critical realist believes that there are differences between what people perceive as reality and reality itself. This is because; critical realists believe that how we perceive reality is impacted on by social factors involved in the process of gaining knowledge. Critical realists use both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Structural functionalism as a sociological perspective is used to evaluate societies and their constituent features which bring about interconnection and mutual integrations. It scrutinizes the social functions carried out by each element in a social system so as to function as a whole. Therefore, social structures are the major areas of analysis from which the functions of the social structures are deduced from. The theory therefore implies that, social structure is formed by collection of social institution which works collaboratively to maintain the harmony of the social whole. Women scholars in the 1970s came up with the feminist perspective arguing that the methods of research in use then were rooted in male bias. Researches seemed to concentrate on male interests and women and their issues were marginalised. In the field of social research, women argued that men had underestimated the role of gender division as an important aspect of social life. Feminist approach critiques the quantitative way of doing research arguing that the nature of women’s lives cannot be quantified. The argument goes further to propose that women are just disembodied sources of information and that their humanity is an important part of any research. Feminism is of the view that one cannot separate reason from emotion. This means that the methodologies and methods applied in this kind of research would have to be consistent with the perspectives that women have. Thus such a method would not agree with some methods like use of pre-coded questionnaires (Crotty 2003). Feminist perspective sees researches carried out under such assumptions favour qualitative methods of data collection. It is on this basis that they argue that most researches provide inaccurate information when men and women are applied as objects as research and coded questionnaires used. The reason behind this is that, women are given limited choices and end up answering per the researcher’s perspectives and not what they feel in actual sense. In this regard, the research is biased and the results lack the basic essence of research which is accuracy and precision. Another method that has become popular in social research is the use of fiction. According to Banks (2008) fiction only fiction to some extent, fiction draws from the real world and real life issues form the material for fictional work. The readers of fictional work are able to relate to the worlds depicted by the fictional work. Krauss (2005) posits that at the heart of the qualitative-quantitative debate is philosophical rather than methodological differences. For instance qualitative researchers argue that the best way to understand a phenomenon is to look at it in its context. Many qualitative researchers believe that to best study a phenomenon, it is important to immerse oneself in its context and cultural setting. Qualitative research bases its assumptions on a relativist, constructivist ontology which argues that there is not objective reality. Positivism takes more dominion in the science world. It believes that the data and its analysis are value-free (Krauss 2005). Healy and Perry (2000) observe that qualitative researchers hold this view and that they view the world in a one way. Positivists distance themselves from the worlds they study unlike other researchers who believe that they have to participate in real world life in order to understand the issues under inquiry better. The methodologies selected have to match with the phenomena. The main belief with the positivist which distinguishes them from the constructivists is that one can be able to investigate a phenomenon while detached from it. References Bryman, A 1988, Quantity and Quality in Social Research, Routledge, London. Crotty, M 2003, The Foundations of Social Research: Meanings and Perspective in the Research Process, Sage Publications, London. Dobson, P J 2002, Critical realism and information systems research: Why bother with philosophy? Information Research – An International Electronic Journal, 7, 2. Elliott, J 2005, Using Narratives in Social Research: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, Sage Publications, London. Healy, M, and Perry, C 2000, Comprehensive criteria to judge validity and reliability of qualitative research within the realism paradigm. Qualitative Market Research – An International Journal, 3 (3), 118-126. Jensen, K. B. and Neuman, W. R. 2013, Evolving Paradigms of Communication Research, International Journal of Communication, Vol 7, pp.230–238. Jonassen, D.H., 1992. Objectivism versus constructivism: do v/e need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39, 3, pp. 5-14. Kuhn, Thomas, S., 1970(1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolution 2nd Ed., The University of Chicago Press, Chicago Krauss, SE, 2005, Research paradigms and meaning making: a primer, Qualitative report, 10, 4, pp. 758-770. Leavy, P 2012, Fiction and critical perspectives on social research: a research note. Humanity and Society, 36, 3, pp. 251-259. May, T 2001, Social Research: Issues, methods and process, Open University Press, Buckingham. Reinharz, S 1992, Feminist Methods in Social Research. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Rowntree, D. 1981, Statistics without Tears. A Primer for the non-mathematicians, Penguin, London. Taylor, B., Kermode, S. and Roberts, K, 2006, Research in nursing and Healthcare, 3rd Ed, Thomson, Sydney. Weber, M, 1968, Economy and society: an outline of interpretive sociology, University of California Press, Berkeley. Read More