Advantages Of Positivist Approach

Positivism and interpretivism are two approaches of interpreting social reality, that each employ different methods of research and data collection to better help understand the study of human lived experiences. The positivist-interpretivist debate revolves around the ways in which human behavior should be conceptualized and studied (Pruss 1996: 4). Positivism is the most widely practiced research approach in social science, which regards the nature of social reality independent of consciousness. Positivists believe social reality can be studied independently from the researcher and that social life can be represented using numbers that according to positivists reveal features of social reality. On the other hand, interpretivists favor partipcant observation, interviews and social interaction where the researcher immerses into the informant’s reality to gain knowledge of their everyday human lived experiences.

Positivism or more specifically, logical positivism, is “maintained that science is value free, independent of the scientist, and obtained using objective methods” (McEwen & Wills, 2007, p.8). This leads to no biased interpretation of the data. In summary, objectivity and facts are the basis of received view.

Quantitative and qualitative methods differ from one another as to their research design elements as listed below:

The interpretive view also believes that theses meanings that persuade human behaviour is created through specific interactions

The biases, assumptions and interpretations that may affect the seemingly objective observation of events may well be too numerous to completely mention. Put simply and dryly,

The major scientific method in the natural sciences used for collecting data is the laboratory experiment. In Sociology, the major scientific method used by positivists is the social or sample survey, which incorporates the use of the questionnaire and/or structured interview. Positivists also advocate the use of some types of secondary data, particularly official statistics.

This write appreciates facts and data mostly, thus would choose a quantitative method of research. They are concise, the sampling size can be larger and the limitations to human subjectivity usually are less. It is believed that the accuracy of the study is greater and more

Empiricists believe that you gain knowledge through experience, however, what our experiences are telling us can also be lies. Bertrand Russell made up the term “sense data” to explain what our experiences really are. Russell’s explanation of sense data inevitably leads to bigger skeptical worries that seem unanswerable. Russell presents strong arguments for skepticism and then ultimately dodges them with the use of the law of parsimony. Russell’s response to his argument lacks luster and falls short, his argument should have left him a skeptic.

The positivism perspective is an extension to the empiricism view on knowledge that states that knowledge comes from induction and observable experiences and that this knowledge is used to explain social phenomena (Benton & Craib, 2011). Nevertheless, the empiric view of knowledge on which positivism is based has long been subject to limitations. Immanuel Kant noted for instance that knowledge does not only come from the senses but also from a basic pallet of conceptual knowledge we all have. Furthermore, the interpretation of observations can differ due to the different way everyone acquires concepts. The claims done by Staman and Slob (2012) mentioned earlier are analyzed below for using this perspective on science.

Positivists utilize the tenets of scientific realism because they feel that the social and psychological world can be evaluated mathematically in the same way that quantitative research explains phenomena in the natural world (p.13).

One advantage of using interpretivist methods of research is that the responses are valid and close to the truth. With the individual mattering they give a good reflection of how people are truly feeling often providing an accurate picture and measuring what the researcher set out to measure.

Both Marxist and positivist stress the need for a rigorous scientific method, for scientific analysis of the social phenomenon and natural world.

The second feature of positivism revolves around its use of statistical data. Using these classifications it will be possible for me to count sets of observable or visible social facts and details which will aids me in producing statistics. For example, I will collect data on social facts concerning the level of depression in different races- such as white and black individuals. I will be basing my research on one hundred white individuals and one hundred black individuals.

Today, phenomenology has progressed as a human science and is used by professional disciplines such as health science, education, clinical psychology and law (Given, 2008). Phenomenology is focused on studying the unique lived experiences of individuals (Giorgi, 1997). The aim of the phenomenological research is to look for the essence of a phenomenon through perception and consciousness of observed individuals and analyse the meaning people give a phenomenon (Giorgi, 1997; Smith et al., 2009). In terms of epistemology, phenomenology highlights subjective personal interpretation and experience perceived by human consciousness (Giorgi, 1997). All phenomenological research demands basic knowledge of philosophical rationale, furthermore, it requires understanding how researcher´s own views are affecting the study (Creswell,

Positivism is a rigorous and formal way to collect and analyze data that was developed around the 1960’s by Auguste Comte (1798-1857) who is also credited with formalizing it. Studies are clear and straight forward and researchers believe that there is only one method that all sciences should rely on. Positivism believes