1. PARADIGMS AND FAIRY TALES Dr Alison Jane Pickard

2. Paradigm ‘the common set of beliefs and agreements shared between scientists about how a problem should be understood and addressed’ (Kuhn, 1962 p.45) ‘the entire constellation of beliefs, values, techniques, and so on shared by members of a given [scientific] community’ (Kuhn, 1970, p.146) ‘…is the ‘world view’ that is accepted by members of a particular scientific discipline which guides the subject of the research, the activity of the research and the nature of the research outputs’ (Pickard, 2007 p. 5) ‘a philosophical or theoretical framework of a scientific school or discipline…’ (Merriam Webster Dictionary, 2007)

3. Paradigm shift

4. Paradigm shifts Thomas Kuhn: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962)

5. Why does it matter? 'paradigm issues are crucial; no inquirer ought to go about the business of inquiry without being clear about just what paradigm informs and guides his or her approach (Guba and Lincoln, 1998 p.218). What makes up the philosophical and theoretical framework of a scientific discipline? Ontology - is the nature of reality, different ways of constructing reality; ‘how things are’ and ‘how things really work’ (Denzin & Lincoln, 1988 p.210) Epistemology - is the philosophy of how we can know that reality; different forms of knowledge of that reality. Methodology - is the practice of how we come to know that reality; the tools we use to know that reality.

6. Ontology EpistemologyMethodology Research Paradigm

7. Paradigm differences The three questions then are; What is the nature of reality? - This is the ontological question concerning the nature and form of reality. What is the nature of the relationship between the knower and the known? – This is the epistemological question. How we can come to know it? - This is the methodological question.

8. The major paradigms Positivism associated with quantitative research Interpretivist / constructivist associated with qualitative research Post-positivism Mixed methods Pragmatism “I suppose it is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail.” (Abraham Maslow)

9. PositivismPost-positivismInterpretivist / constructivist Ontological stance ‘Realism’ Belief in a tangible, social reality. This reality exists independently of those ‘creating’ the reality. A social reality can exist just as a natural reality exists [water remains water whether someone is swimming in it or not] ‘Critical Realism’ Belief in a social reality but acceptance that knowing this reality will always be inhibited by imperfections in detecting its nature. The imperfections are due to human fallibility. ‘Relativist’ Belief in multiple, constructed realities that cannot exist outside of the social contexts that create them. Realities vary in nature and are time and context bound. Epistemological stance Objectivist / Dualist. Investigator and investigated are independent of each other. Modified dualist / objectivist. Acceptance that independence is not possible but objectivity is seen as the goal and demonstrated by external verification. Transactional / subjectivist. The results of the investigation are a product of interaction between the subject and the investigator. What can be known is a result of the interaction. Methodological stance Experimental / manipulative. Hypothesis testing, variables identified prior to the investigation. Empirical testing is conducted in order to establish the ‘truth’ of the proposition. Predominantly quantitative. Analysis by variables. Modified experimental / manipulative. Hypothesis testing but more emphasis placed on context. Quantitative & qualitative. Analysis by variables. Empathetic interaction. Investigator interacts with the object of the investigation. Each construction of reality is investigated in its own right and is interpreted by the investigator. Qualitative including hermeneutics & dialectic interchanges Analysis by case PurposePrediction / control / explanation. Framing of general laws. Prediction / control / explanation. Generalisations Understanding / reconstruction. Transfer of findings.

10. Positivism Positivists see the world as a collection of observable facts which can be measured. Ontological stance - Realism There exists a single, tangible, objective reality. We can understand it through the laws that govern it. Epistemological stance - Objectivist / dualist Objective observation leading to discovery of that reality Methodology Experimental, objective observation. Purpose predication / control / explanation / verification (1798–1857) (1596-1650)

11. What can we ‘know’? “… those who are seeking the strict way of truth should not trouble themselves about any object concerning which they cannot have a certainty equal to arithmetic or geometrical demonstration” (Descartes, as cited in Lines, 2001, p. 172). If it can’t be counted or measured with certainty then we can never truly know it. Questions: What? How much? Relationships / casual effect Those best answered with Numerical precision Hypothesis formulation

12. Post-positivism During the early twentieth century natural science underwent an enormous shift physics was the driving force behind this shift. There was a move from the rigid mechanistic Newtonian physics to the concept of ‘uncertainty’ and ‘relativity’. Einstein and Heisenburg took physics from the language of deterministic laws to probability and uncertainty (Corbetta, 2003) Determinism inhibits the true goal of research which is discovery (Popper, 1963)

13. Early paradigm shift New theories of uncertainty and probability leading to the tentative nature of discovery, were adopted in social research with the concept of ‘falsification’ introduced by Karl Popper between 1959 and 1963. It was no longer possible to ‘prove’ a hypothesis as it could never be certain that an alternative explanation did not exist for the relationship between the variables. Current post-positivism is rooted in the premise that any perception of reality cannot be an objective picture but is a picture drawn from empirical observation and existing theory.

14. Post-positivism Post-positivists see the world as a collection of observable facts which can be measured objectively but flawed. Ontological stance - Critical realism: Belief in a social reality but acceptance that knowing this reality will always be inhibited by imperfections in detecting its nature. The imperfections are due to human fallibility. Epistemological stance - modified dualist / objectivist: Acceptance that independence is not possible but objectivity is seen as the goal and demonstrated by external verification. Methodology - Modified experimental / manipulative. Purpose predication / control / explanation / Generalisations

15. What can we ‘know’? Very similar to that of Positivism What? How much? Relationships / casual effect Those best answered with Numerical precision Hypothesis formulation / falsification The more ‘qualitative’ notion of ‘interpretation’ is often included in this approach allowing for the possibility of prior knowledge impacting on the perceptions of results.

16. Interpretivism / Constructivism Interpretivism’ is used as a covering term for a number of approaches to research, essentially the areas we are concerned with can be grouped into two distinct groups; ‘empirical interpretivism’ (constructivism) dealing with investigation in natural settings of social phenomena ‘critical theory’ engaging in ideologically orientated investigation, examining current thought and social structures.

17. Interpretivism / Constructivism Ontology – Relativism: Interpretivists belief that realities are multiple, constructed and holistic, there is no single, tangible reality, instead there are only the complex, multiple realities of the individual. Epistemology - Transactional / subjectivist: The known and the knower influence each other; all descriptions are time and context bound; it is impossible to separate cause from effect as all entities are in a state of simultaneous shaping Methodology - Empathetic interaction: Interpretivists take the stance that any research activity will leave the subject of that research in an altered state. Purpose – transfer of findings based on contextual applicability:

18. Qualitative or Quantitative methodology? Paradigm Does imply Methodology May imply Method May imply Technique May imply Instrument

19. My Definitions Research methodology: This is the theoretical perspective of the research, that is the overall nature of the research activity. Research method: This is the bounded system created by the researcher to engage in empirical investigation, the overall approach, often referred to as a ‘strategy.’ Research techniques: These are the individual data collection techniques applied within the method. The most obvious example of lack of distinction between method and techniques is the use of the terms ‘survey’ and ‘questionnaire’; very often the two are used interchangeably within the research methods literature. Research instrument: This is the devise that is designed or trained to collect the data necessary to provide insight or offer answers to the questions being asked.

20. Quantitative research Quantitative research begins with a theoretical framework established from the literature review a hypothesis will emerge and the variables within that hypothesis can be identified. The notion of a hypothesis can also be translated into research aims and objectives it is only compulsory to have a hypothesis when true experimental research is chosen as the method select the most appropriate research method calculate the sample and design the data collection within that method. Once data collection is complete it is then time to process and analyse the data. With data analysis complete the researcher then has the ‘evidence’ to either falsify or support the hypothesis.

21. Quantitative research design Topic of interest Literature reviewTheoretical framework Define variablesDefine problem Define aim / objectives Collect data, analyse and interpret Hypotheses supported ? Framing of general laws Generalisations made to wider context Yes No Falsification Create hypotheses aim / objectives achieved

22. Qualitative research The emergent design of qualitative research does not allow for a detailed plan before the research begins ‘the research design must therefore be ‘played by ear’; it must unfold, cascade, roll, emerge’ (Lincoln and Guba, 1985 p.203) Human research instrument The researcher plays the role of ‘instrument’ trained to capture the data as it ‘comes in’ Emergent design Responding the story as it reveals itself Negotiated outcomes Interaction between the researcher and the researched – interpretation based on the relationship between the two.

23. Qualitative research design Focus of the inquiry in natural setting Literature review Data collection Purposive sampling Inductive data analysis Grounded theory Emergent Design Case study Cross-case analysis Working hypothesis Explicit & tacit knowledge Human instrument

24. Criteria for judging research. Truth value Is it possible to establish ‘truth’ of the data collected? Applicability Can the data collected and subsequent findings from that data be applied to other situations? Consistency Could these findings be replicated? Neutrality Is the data free from researcher bias? Quantitative research Rigour Qualitative research Trustworthiness

25. Quantitative methodology [Rigor] Qualitative methodology [Trustworthiness] Mixed methodological approach Truth valueInternal validityCredibilityValidity / credibility ApplicabilityExternal validityTransferabilityGeneralisability ConsistencyReliabilityDependabilitySynchronic reliability NeutralityObjectivityConfirmabilityObjectivity Research ‘value’

26. Trustworthiness Credibility prolonged engagement with the research participants; persistent observation of those participants; triangulation of the techniques used to study those participants and their contexts; peer debriefing, and member checks. Transferability. ‘the trouble with generalisations is that they don’t apply to particulars’ (Lincon and Guba 1985, p.110) Here the researcher provides ‘rich pictures’ on an individual level, the user of the research then gathers, or already has, empirical evidence concerning the cases to which they wish to apply the findings. Dependability established by an ‘inquiry audit’, where an external ‘auditor’ examines the research process. Confirmability the results, accepted as the subjective knowledge of the researcher, can be traced back to the raw data of the research, not merely a product of the ‘observer’s worldview, disciplinary assumptions, theoretical proclivities and research interests’

27. Rigor Internal validity the way in which a casual relationship is demonstrated, is it clear that the effect is indeed attributable to the cause? External validity the extent to which findings from the investigation can be generalised to the wider context, this is dependent on the sample used in the investigation and to what extent the sample is ‘representative’ of the wider population. Reliability stability of the research findings over time and across locations. Typically the test, re-test method is used to demonstrate reliability / cross-sectional analysis of the data. Objectivity The goal is to demonstrate that the investigation is value-free, free from any personal constructs of the researcher.

28. PARADIGMS – FAIRY TALES? Does striving and debating over paradigm and methodological issues help in achieving the aims and goals of the research? Does it all matter?

29. THANK YOU Dr Alison Jane Pickard