Predicting outcomes and results-interpretive and positivist approach - Essay Example

Predicting outcomes and results-interpretive and positivist approach In the of making predictions, humans tend toapply various approaches towards the results expected. Others may tend to rely on their feeling towards the subject in question then make an assumption, while others may tend to use facts that explain the outcome in question. As seen in the argument of analysts and researchers in sociology, predicting outcomes by individuals in the society is a subject that can be analyzed using both the interpretive and positivist approaches. In an attempt to understand human behavior, it is of essence to analyze their thoughts and perceptions towards a particular subject. This essay shall aim to assess the basic of interpretive and positivist approaches in an attempt to analyze human behaviour in making predictions. Interpretive approach As seen in argument of Sandberg, interpretive approaches are based on the beliefs and the meanings individuals ascribe to various aspects in the society (44). This is to mean that in the case of interpretive approaches to beliefs, individuals do not think of laws and rules and deductive approaches of thinking. In relation to making predictions and the interpretive approach, the approach leads to an analysis of various questions regarding the predictions being made, and provide answers to those questions, on the basis of the predictions made in terms of telling a story. An understanding of the predictions made, is then understood on the grounds of the experiences that human beings have had in the past touching on the issues at hand. For instance in the case of politics, individuals might make predictions in consideration to the existing aspects in the society such as the voting patterns of individuals, the present electoral system, the voting behaviour of the citizens, in our case ‘Obamaism’ amongst others. Using interpretive approaches, human beings then critique the contestants for the elections, by asking questions that touch on their future in the world of politics, assess their methods of campaign then make predictions on their success in the elections. Such an approach clearly does not assess the policies of each candidate but simply weighs their contribution and the numbers they have managed to garner in the campaign rallies. This approach can then be argued as one that is full of flaws as persons use their own beliefs to pass judgments, as opposed to making critical evaluations on the policies of the concerned individuals in our case the presidential aspirants (Sandberg 44). Sandberg continues to argue that interpretive approaches are the root causes of faults in the society as they majorly focus on the theoretical assumptions to make final judgments (45). Prainsack attests to the fact that interpretive approaches have led making the wrong conclusions touching on various subjects (404). In the case of legalizing marijuana, it is evident that the same would not have been legalized had the interpretive approach had been implemented. This is because genetic testing on the pros and demerits of marijuana would have already been predetermined in the mind; thus, a misinterpretation of the results achieved. Probably, the recipients of the results on marijuana would have anxiety as they will misinterpret the results, holding the belief that marijuana solely has health risks, not considering the benefits of the drug. This is to mean that the users already have hegemonic ideas on how and why things should be done (Prainsack 404). However, Lin argues that interpretive approach is one that provides valid data as the work is reliable, due to the fact that the researcher applies the causal mechanism to explain occurrences through detailed descriptions of what is observed and linking them with the present (169-170). Positivist approach As opposed to the interpretive approach, the positivist approach as seen in the argument of Kemper is one that focuses on research based on knowledge, information and assumptions made from a positive interpretation and verification of what is observed rather than on what feelings one has regarding a particular subject (339). This is interpreted to mean that positivist approach does not rely on introspection and intuition feelings to an understanding of concepts and behaviors (Lin 163). The positivist approach is then a scientific one that analyses concepts from the statements made to the conclusions from the same statements. This is to say that objective reality is achievable and that persons can explain this reality using facts using symbols and valid explanations (Lin 164). In predicting the future and explaining the results of the same, the positivist approach will be instrumental in predicting and controlling the variables that explain this future (Lin 170). This is to mean that the causes and effects of a pattern in making a conclusion are analyzed. For instance in the case of Oscar nominee awards, a person would argue for an inclusion of an individual in the nominee list on the basis of them being new in the industry and having taken the top rank in numerous chart listings based on their performance in the specific field. The approach also indicates that the observable factors that are interpreted through our senses can act as good source of accurate data analysis (Lin 172). Through observations, persons can measure various variables to come with up data touching on happenings in the society (Lin 172). Through a visualization of the behaviour of gay persons, it leads to an understanding that they are humans just like pothers, and they need to be accorded respect thus, allowing for gay marriages in the society. As opposed to the interpretive approach that would insist that gay marriages are wrong based on their visualization of it being wrong, by simply indicating that it is morally wrong, the positivist approach gives it a critical approach that sees the gays as humans who have needs and need to enjoy them just like any other human being. The positivist approach as argued by Lin indicates that research is free that the methodological approach needs to be followed, and this makes it easier to attain objectivity (172). This methodology then relies on experiments as opposed to the theoretical approach applied by the interpretive method. In this case, the research conducted may be termed as valid and reliable. In an event that one would need to analyze Sports contests like World Series, the Super Bowl, NBA Playoffs, the positivist approach looks at the wins of each time and not the caliber and the status of the persons in the team. However, this approach also uses the observable facts to come with conclusions on certain aspects in the society. This is to mean that observations made may be biased, thus, altering the truth, which is the final conclusion. Lin indicates that the positivist approach lacks the provision of causal mechanism that explains the link the past experience of the researcher and the present (167). Conclusion Conclusively, the positivist approach is arguably more valid as offers an explanation of the theories that are simply stated or rather narrated by the interpretivists. The meta-theoretical approach is simply one that gives a background of the research to be done. The positivist approach uses these theories to explain facts as assumed in the assumptions of the theories. The positivist approach is then one that is practical and gives satisfactory explanations as opposed to narrations. Though positivist approach may have flaws in interpretation of the scientific methods used in data analysis, I am of the opinion that this method of research has minimal demerits as opposed to the flaws that may result to the observations, beliefs and judgments of persons with varying preconceptions of concepts. Works cited Kemper, Theodore . ‘Social Constructionist and Positivist Approaches to the Sociology of Emotions.’ American Journal of Sociology 87. 2 (1981): 336-362. Lin, Chin. ‘Bridging positivist and interpretivist approaches to qualitative methods.’ Policy Studies Journal 26.1(1998): 162. Prainsack, Barbara. ‘The Power of Prediction: How Personal Genomics became a Policy Challenge more’. OZP 40.4 (2011): 401–415. Sandberg, Jorgen. ‘How Do We Justify Knowledge Produced within Interpretive Approaches?’ Organizational Research Methods, 8.1 (2005): 41-68. Read More