Positionality: Scientific Method and Research

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.

Before joining my Masters in Business administration, I have done few researches at my working places, not knowing that there are some many methods, approaches, etc. Thanks to Dr. Stephen Sommerville, for teaching me to do research in the professional way. Let my first research be the critical review of my own positionality i.e. who am I to me and in the others point of view? Does my positionality affect the research works I took or will take?

Phenomenological interview limitations may appear due to the researcher’s lack of experience in conducting interviews (Downey, 2015); which may interfere with the researcher’s focus and intentionality (Ashworth, 2017). Limitations may occur with the relationship between the researcher and the interviewee, including power struggles which might affect trust and honest participant reflections (Boucher, 2017). Further, time limitations could impede upon a participants deliberation process during the interview process (Downey, 2015). If a researcher is to understand the essence of a phenomenon; a suspension of judgment is required during participant interviews (Ashworth, 2017). Additionally, the researcher will need to be extremely attentive to experience the study through the participants’ eyes (Kelley, 2016). Individuals may choose not to answer every question, which is acceptable; yet, missing data can also become a limitation to the study. However, if enough participants do not answer the same question, the question might need to be reframed or removed; additionally, secondary data, such as technical reports, white papers or additional publications might be necessary to validate the research question (Johnston, 2014).

My positionality is composed both of cultural aspects and personal lived experiences that engender me towards certain perspectives (Holmes, 2014), thus introducing subjectivity in my research. As such, I must understand where my positionality is derived from to ensure that my research remains as “truthful” as possible (Holmes, 20014). I must remain self-conscious about my own views and positions and how they may influence my design, execution and interpretation of the research data findings (Greenback, 2003). Understanding my own positionality further guides me to remain cognizant of it while practicing and sustaining reflexivity throughout my research. Berger (2013) remarks it as a means of acknowledging my own subjectivity,

Cognitive interpretation: a process whereby stimuli are placed in existing categories of meaning Affective interpretation: the emotional or feeling response triggered by a stimulus

I’ve always been the type of person to always plan ahead, to always assess each defining factor, and to always prepare myself for whatever life throws at me. As I type this, I look back and evaluate as well as reflect upon the very occurrences that have led me to where I am today: my family-my parents in particular, as they never made it through to college-so this process is new to everyone within my household, my own failures and successes, my community, and my education have all been vast influences on my character, especially my growth as a young adult. Recently, I’ve been pondering as to what will define me as an individual; what will have the greatest impact on me that will distinguish me from others, and more importantly what will help me apprehend my own goals? Everyone can say that they’re lives being the way they were guided them to the path they ended up on, and I know that is true too, but I feel there’s something more prominent as to why a person chooses to pursue a particular goal, career, or other dealings. This realization arose from my participation in the Regional Program for Excellence, a program that provides students with internships in fields they’re inquiring in before entering college, and my inquisitions regarding the significance as well as the impact on my rapidly changing life.

I have always been thinking that what makes who I am today. Whether my family, my surrounding or my own personality. I have been trying to find out the answer and I think that I have found out the answer. It is a combination of all of the criterias mentioned above that have shaped my personality and made me who I am today. Although I might not really sure who I am to others, but I will introduce myself to you and tell you who I think I am in this essay.

The need for scientific research in the field of psychology per module 2.1 (n.d), helps us to understand behavior through physiological and cognitive processes that create the behavior (para. 3). Therefore, a better understanding of ourselves and of the world around us is gained. With empirical evidence gained through research there is an objective and supported claim that can be repeated over and over, regardless of who is conducting the research. Through research facts can be established as observable realities that will withstand skepticism and examination from different perspectives. As an example, the credentials or expertise of the individual making the claim would

The study was interpretive a form of qualitative methodology allowed the researcher's made comments on interpretive relies upon the human subject as the instruments to measure some phenomena, and typically involves

Positivist sociologists would argue that unstructured interviews are a disadvantage for sociologists to use in sociological research because it cannot be quantified. As unstructured interviews are mainly open-ended questions, the answers cannot be pre-coded. This lack of quantitative data makes unstructured interviews less useful for establishing a cause-and-effect relationship and hypothesis testing that positivists prefer. For example, it is impossible to quantify how a woman might feel after experiencing domestic violence, making it difficult to establish a relationship between the actions taken against women and the long term psychological effect. Therefore, unstructured interviews are a disadvantage when used in sociological research. However, interpretivist sociologists may see the

A second advantage of using positivist methods of research is that they allow the participant to give more personal and depth in their responses. Interpretivist methods of research focus on the individual rather than the responses collectively which allows the respondent to provide answers with feeling and meaning and also detailed responses.

Research paradigms are ‘the entire constellation of beliefs, values, techniques, and so on shared by members of a given community’ (Kuhn, 1970, p.175). The three most common paradigms are positivism, constructivism or interpretivism and pragmatism. Each of these can be categorised further by examining their: ontology, epistemology and methodology. Fundamentally, ontology is the nature of reality, epistemology describes the relationship the investigator has with their version of reality, and methodology is the various techniques and tools used to analysis their research.

Charmaz (2014) highlighted the importance of recognizing the researcher as a inquiry instrument, given that the “researcher’s position, privileges, perspective, and interactions” are “an inherent part of the research reality” (p. 12). Second, prior to beginning the interview, participants completed a demographic questionnaire (Appendix B). This questionnaire asked for information on their classification in college, age, gender, major, self-identification of race/ethnicity, birthplace, parents’ level of educational attainment, and the number of their siblings who have entered higher education.

The social science paradigm also known as Post positivism consists of testing hypothesis and research questions that are developed through reasoning. This is done through measurements and observation. Social scientists aspire to science and they seek to study human behaviour, interaction and thought in an organized way; which we can then measure, generalize and replicate. Like any research, post-positivism needs to be backed up by evidence. When a social science research sets out a research project, it is their goal to find evidence that can either agree or disagree with the hypothesis or theories. Post positivism, compared to positivism allows more interaction with the participants of the research project and seeks to highlight the relationship between universal properties between the variables. The best way to understand post positivism is by comparing it to positivism and the interpretive paradigm. Compared to positivism, post positivism is more tolerant for value-based information, however is not focused on qualitative information like the interpretive paradigm, instead the research is mainly focused on quantitative data.

Lastly, to address the affective domain, I chose to develop personal values for how I will conduct research. To complete this goal, I participated in class discussions, verbalizing my values and personal opinions on material presented in this class, as well as responding to peers. I feel that I have partially met this objective, as my personal values are not set in stone, but are being developed with ongoing exposure to research methodologies and strategies. Thus, a future goal is to continue to identify my personal values in regard to research, bearing in mind the value of ethics and morals.