Philosophical Underpinnings

of Qualitative Research
Manjula Bharathy
Professor, CUPG
SoHS
 Research in Social Sciences
• Scientific research contributes to a body of science, and it
follows the scientific method.
• Science refers to a systematic and organized body of
knowledge in any area of inquiry that is acquired using “the
scientific method”
• The natural sciences are very precise, accurate, deterministic,
and independent of the person making the scientific
observations.
• Scientific knowledge refers to a generalized body of laws and
theories to explain a phenomenon or behavior of interest that
are acquired using the scientific method.
• Laws are observed patterns of phenomena or behaviors, while
theories are systematic explanations of the underlying
phenomenon or behavior.
 Operationalisation
• Operationalisation is the process of designing precise measures for
abstract theoretical constructs. This is a major problem in social
science research, given that many of the constructs, such as prejudice,
alienation, and liberalism are hard to define, let alone measure
accurately.

• Operationalization starts with specifying an “operational definition” (or

“conceptualization”) of the constructs of interest.

• Scientific research requires operational definitions that define

constructs in terms of how they will be empirically measured.
• For instance, the operational definition of a construct such as
temperature must specify whether we plan to measure temperature in
Celsius, Fahrenheit, or Kelvin scale. A construct such as income should
be defined in terms of whether we are interested in monthly or annual
income, before-tax or after-tax income, and personal or family income.
 Variables
• Depending on their intended use, variables
may be classified as independent and
dependent variables.
• Variables that explain other variables are
called independent variables
• Those that are explained by other variables
are dependent variables – variations are
explained by independent variable (s)
 Paradigm
• Paradigm can be defined as a mental model or
a framework of thought or belief through
which researcher interprets the reality.
• A paradigm speaks about researchers
philosophical orientation
• It reflects researchers’ abstract beliefs that
guide his/her interpretation of reality.
• Paradigm comprises Ontology, Epistemology,
Methodology and Methods
 Ontology
• The word ontology is derived from the Greek words ‘ontos’
which means being and ‘logos’ which means study,
therefore, it is the study of being.
• It is concerned with “what kind of world we are
investigating, with the nature of existence, with the
structure of reality as such”.
• Guba and Lincolin (1989:83) state that the ontological
assumptions are those that respond to the question ‘what is
there that can be known?’ or ‘what is the nature of reality?’
• Two important types of Ontology are Realism and
Relativism ( Bailey) . There are other ontological positions
between these two contrasting views of realities .
 Realism
• Realism is a belief that one universal reality exists.
• Realists believe :
 in the truth that is objective, static and measurable
 Context – free generalisations
 Cause and effect laws.
 Research that converges on the truth
 Reductionist and deterministic approaches
 Reality is independent of any theories or any human beliefs
 Reality exists, even if it is unknown
 Ontological perspective within positivist paradigm and
quantitative approach
 Relativism
• Ontologically Speaking, reality is subjective and it varies from
person to person, so there are many subjective realities
• As different people live in different worlds, they use different
means to gain knowledge and understand the realities and so
multiple truths
• Research based on relativism, searches for meaning in the
experience of individuals.
• Relativists Believe in :
 searching for meaning rather than truth
 Truths are dynamic, subjective and contextual
 Multiple truths that may conflicts, but still are true
 Perceptions, or truths that may change over time
• Relativism is the ontological perspective within a interpretative
or qualitative paradigm
 Epistemology
• The branch of study that deals with different methods of
knowing are called epistemology.
• It is the most important branch of philosophy that deals with
questions such as: how we come to know something? Is
knowledge acquired or do one need to experience it
personally? What is the relationship between the researcher
and those who are researched (Kivunja & Kuyini, 2017)?
• Epistemology is concerned with the nature and forms of
knowledge (Cohen et al., 2007). Epistemological assumptions
are concerned with how knowledge can be created, acquired
and communicated, in other words what it means to know.
 Methodology & Methods
• Methodology is the strategy or plan of action which lies
behind the choice and use of particular methods (Crotty,
1998. p. 3). Thus, methodology is concerned with why,
what, from where, when and how data is collected and
analyzed. Guba and Lincon (1994, p. 108) explain that
methodology asks the question: how can the inquirer go
about finding out whatever they believe can be known?
• Methods are the specific techniques and procedures used
to collect and analyze data (Crotty, 1998, p. 3). The data
collected will either be qualitative or quantitative. All
paradigms can use both quantitative and qualitative data.
Terms
UnderstandingExplanations
the Terms
Ontology What is reality? What is there ?

Epistemology How can we know reality? How

do I Know
Theoretical Perspective What approaches can we use to
acquire knowledge?

Methodology What procedure can we use to

acquire knowledge?

Method What tools can we use for

acquiring knowledge ?

Sources What data can we collect?

 Ontological Assumptions
Give Rise to

Epistemological Assumptions
Give Rise to
Methodological Considerations
Give Rise to

Instruments and Data Collection

 Positivism as a Paradigm
• Auguste Comte, the 19th century French philosopher believed that the scientific
method was the most advanced and should be applied to the study of the social world
and social sciences as it is in the natural world and natural sciences.

• Positivist position is that social research should try, as far as possible, to emulate the
methods of science.

• “We should therefore try to isolate variables, measure the ways that they varied, look at
the relationships between the variables, develop hypotheses about these relationships,
analyse the variables for experimentation to test a hypothesis, and draw conclusions on
the basis of these studies. In doing all of this - in following ‘scientific method’ -we should
try to be as objective and as neutral as possible. We should watch from the outside as
disinterested observers, trying not to ‘contaminate’ our findings in anyway. The
worldview underpinning all of this is sometimes called realism, namely the view that the
world we perceive is straightforwardly the one that is “out there’. There is not much
room for interpretation about ( Thomas , 2009)
 Scientific Paradigm- Positivism
• The scientific paradigm rose to prominence during the Enlightenment. Comte
popularized the term positivism (Crotty, 1998, p. 19) when he sought to apply
the scientific paradigm, which originated studying the natural world, to the
social world (Cohen et al., p. 9).

• The ontological position of positivism is one of realism.

• Realism is the view that objects have an existence independent of the knower
(Cohen et al., 2007, p. 7). Thus, a discoverable reality exists independently of
the researcher (Pring, 2000a, p. 59). Most positivists assume that reality is not
mediated by our senses. Language fulfills a representational role as it is
connected to the world by some designative function; consequently, words owe
their meaning to the objects which they name or designate (Frowe, 2001, p.
176).
• The positivist epistemology is one of objectivism. Positivists go forth into the
world impartially, discovering absolute knowledge about an objective reality.
The researcher and the researched are independent entities. Meaning solely
resides in objects, not in the conscience of the researcher, and it is the aim of
the researcher to obtain this meaning.
 Positivism
• The Natural Sciences as a Model
• The Quest for Objective Knowledge
• A Deductive or Theory-Testing Approach
• Underpinned by an Objectivist or Realist ontology: facts are
facts
• Explaining how and why things happen: Measurement,
Correlation,
• Statistical Logic, Verification
• Typical Methods: Surveys, Questionnaires, Random Sampling
• Example Hypothesis: Violence on TV Leads to Juvenile
Violence
 Some characteristics of the
Positivist Paradigm

• A theory is universal and thus generalization can be

done.
• Context-independent.
• Truth and knowledge is ‘out there to be discovered’
• Cause and effect are distinguishable.
• The result of the research can be quantified.
• A scientific method of investigation.
• Formulation and testing of hypothesis.
• Theory can be used to predict and control outcomes.
 Interpretivism
• Interpretivism accepts that the world is constantly changing and that
meanings are shifting and contested. We have to accept that there is no
objective, pre-existing truth ‘out here’ waiting to be discovered;
meanings are constructed, not objective. It is not appropriate, therefore,
to employ the methods of the natural sciences.

• “The main point about Interpretivism is that we are interested in people and the way
that they interrelate - what they think and how they form ideas about the world;
how their worlds are constructed. Given that this is the case we have to look closely
at what people are doing by using our own selves, our own knowledge of the world as
people. We have to immerse ourselves in the research contexts in which we are
interested - for example talking to people in depth, attending to every nuance of their
behaviour, every clue to the meanings that they are investing in something. … The key
is understanding. What understandings do the people we are talking to have about
the world, and how can we in turn understand these.”
 Interpretative Paradigm
• The ontological position of Interpretivism is relativism.
• Relativism is the view that reality is subjective and differs from person to
person (Guba & Lincoln, 1994,). Our realties are mediated by our senses.
Without consciousness the world is meaningless. Reality emerges when
consciousness engages with objects which are already pregnant with meaning
(Crotty, 1998,).
• Reality is individually constructed; there are as many realities as individuals.
Language does not passively label objects but actively shapes and moulds
reality (Frowe, 2001). Thus, reality is constructed through the interaction
between language and aspects of an independent world.
• The interpretive epistemology is one of subjectivism which is based on real
world phenomena. The world does not exist independently of our knowledge
of it (Grix, 2004,).
• Meaning is not discovered; it is constructed though the interaction between
consciousness and the world.
• Consciousness is always consciousness of something (Crotty, 1998, p. 44). To
experience a world is to participate in it, simultaneously molding and
encountering it (Heron & Reason, 1997 )
 Characteristics of the
Interpretive Paradigm

• Social world cannot be fully understood from the

individual’s point of view .
• There exist multiple realities which are socially constructed.
• The importance of context is vital for knowledge gathering.
• Knowledge created can be value-laden and values need to
be explicitly mentioned.
• Focus on the individual rather than universal laws.
• Cause and effect are interdependent.
• Contextual factors play a very important role in the pursuit
of any knowledge.
 Challenges of IP
• Interpretive research rejects a foundational base to knowledge, bringing into
question its validity.
• Interpretive research cannot be judged using the same criteria as the
scientific paradigm.

• If reality is subjective and differs from person to person, then research

participants cannot be expected to arrive at exactly the same interpretations
as researchers (Rolfe, 2006)
•
• Knowledge produced by the interpretive paradigm has limited transferability
as it is usually fragmented and not unified into a coherent body.
• Generalizations which are deemed useful to policy makers are often absent
because its research usually produces highly contextualized qualitative data,
and interpretations of this data involve subjective individual constructions.
•
 Critical paradigm (CP)
• The ontological position of the critical paradigm is historical
realism.

• Historical realism is the view that reality has been shaped by

social, political, cultural, economic, ethnic, and gender values.
(Guba & Lincon, 1994). Realities are socially constructed entities
that are under constant internal influence.

• Critical epistemology is one of subjectivism which is based on

real world phenomena and linked with societal ideology.
Knowledge is both socially constructed and influenced by power
relations from within society. Cohen et al. (2009, p. 27) explain
that, “what counts as knowledge is determined by the social
and positional power of the advocates of that knowledge.”
 CP Contd..
• Social constructionism argues that we are born into a world in which meaning has already
been made; we are born into culture. “We come to inhabit a pre-existing system and to be
inhabited by it,” (Crotty, 1998). This pre-existing system consists of consensuses about
knowledge that have already been reached and are still being reached. Furthermore, it is
stratified and marked with inequality.

• Research interests are influenced by culture, race, gender and location (Siegel, 2006, p. 5).
Academic and scientific communities, which validate and legitimize knowledge claims,
unwittingly contribute to systems of oppression.

• For example, much of the social and psychological theory which underpins the scientific
paradigm was developed by white, able-bodied males (Mertens, 2005, p. 17). As knowledge
claims are always embedded in regimes of truth, consideration should be given to
domination, exclusion, privilege and marginalization (Ceci et al., 2002, p. 714).

• The critical paradigm is anti-foundational; it attacks this reality. People are not only in the
world but also with it (Crotty, 1998, p. 149). Reality is alterable by human action.

• The critical paradigm seeks to address issues of social justice and marginalism. The
emancipatory function of knowledge is embraced.
 CP Contd..
• Different theoretical perspectives of critical inquiry include: queer theory and
feminism.
• As it is culturally derived, historically situated and influenced by political
ideology, knowledge is not value free. Critical methodology is directed at
interrogating values and assumptions, exposing hegemony and injustice,
challenging conventional social structures and engaging in social action
(Crotty, 1998, p. 157).
• Inquiry is inseparable from politics. Its aim is to emancipate the
disempowered.
• Critical research should fully acknowledge its context (culturally, historically
and politically) and promote dialogical relations of equality between the
researchers and participants.
• Research must create an agenda for change or reform, enhancing the lives of
the participants. It must have catalytic validity (Cohen et al.,
• 2007).
 CP- Challenges
• Giroux (2011) argues that neoliberal and neoconservative forces are currently
transforming Education and universities into anti-democratic public spheres;
consequently, the right of faculty to work in an autonomous and
• critical fashion is under attack. One way to control research is through funding, and
Knowledge production is influenced by politics.

• A dialogue of equals is virtually impossible as power differentials between researchers

and participants exist

• Emancipation is not guaranteed. The change in the participants’ lives may be negligible
or non-existent. Does the majority of action research make an emancipatory
difference? There is little evidence to suggest so.

• The critical paradigm stereotypes participants in two ways. Firstly, it often labels
participants as belonging to a particular marginalized group; therefore, homogeneous
notions of identity are superimposed. Secondly, the critical paradigm does not
acknowledge that different participants enter the research with varying levels of
conscientization. It naively assumes that populations blindly do the bidding of
powerful regimes, further enslaving themselves in the process.
Nature Qualitative Quantitative

Exploration of Participants Search for Causal Explanations,

Observation and Life Testifying hypothesis,
Experiences Prediction, ,Control
Generation of Theory from Data

Approach Subjective Objective

Broad Focus Narrow Focus
Process Oriented Product Oriented
Context- bound, often Natural Context- Free, often in artificial
Setting or laboratory setting
Keeping distance from the data
Getting close to the data

Sample Participants, Subjects Respondents, Informants

Purposive Sampling Randomized Sampling
Flexible sampling that develops Sample frame fixed before
during research research starts
Data Collection In-depth, Non- Questionnaire ,
standardized interviews Standardized Interviews
Tightly Structured
Participant Observation/ Observation/
Field Work

Analysis Thematic, Constant Statistical Analysis

Comparative Analysis

Outcome A story, Ethnography, Measurable Results

Theory

Relationships Direct Relationship with Limited Involvement with

the Researcher and the the Researched and the
Researched , Close Researcher
Relationship Distant Relationship
 Qualitative Research
Approach What does it involve?
Grounded theory Researchers collect rich data on a topic of interest and
develop theories inductively.

Ethnography Researchers immerse themselves in groups or organizations

to understand their cultures.

Action research Researchers and participants collaboratively link theory to

practice to drive social change.

Phenomenological Researchers investigate a phenomenon or event by

research describing and interpreting participants’ lived experiences.

Narrative research Researchers examine how stories are told to understand

how participants perceive and make sense of their
experiences.
 Qualitative research often tries to preserve the voice and perspective
of participants. Advantages of QR are :

• Flexibility
The data collection and analysis process can be adapted as new ideas
or patterns emerge. They are not rigidly decided beforehand.
• Natural settings
Data collection occurs in real-world contexts or in naturalistic ways.
• Meaningful insights and Thick data
Detailed descriptions of people’s experiences, feelings and
perceptions can be used in designing, testing or improving systems or
products.
• Generation of new ideas
Open-ended responses mean that researchers can uncover novel
problems or opportunities that they wouldn’t have thought of
otherwise.
 Researchers must consider practical and theoretical limitations in
analyzing and interpreting their data. Qualitative research suffers from:

• Subjectivity
Due to the researcher’s primary role in analyzing and interpreting data,
qualitative research cannot be replicated. The researcher decides what is
important and what is irrelevant in data analysis, so interpretations of the
same data can vary greatly.

• Limited generalizability
Small samples are often used to gather detailed data about specific contexts.
Despite rigorous analysis procedures, it is difficult to draw generalizable
conclusions because the data may be biased and unrepresentative of the
wider population.

• Labor-intensive
Although software can be used to manage and record large amounts of text,
data analysis often has to be checked or performed manually.
Inductive and Deductive Research
• In inductive research, the goal of a researcher
is to infer theoretical concepts and patterns
from observed data.
• In deductive research, the goal of the
researcher is to test concepts and patterns
known from theory using new empirical data.
• Hence, inductive research is also called theory-
building research, and deductive research is
theory-testing research.
 Research Skills
• Conducting scientific research, requires two sets of skills
– theoretical and methodological – needed to operate
in the theoretical and empirical levels respectively.
• Methodological skills ("know-how") are relatively
standard, invariant across disciplines, and easily
acquired through teaching programs.
• However, theoretical skills ("know-what") is
considerably harder to master, requires years of
observation and reflection, and are tacit skills that
cannot be “taught” but rather learned though
experience.
Research Ethics