Sample Methodology Essay

Throughout the United States, the workforce has adjusted to fit the many necessities of the employees and the different organizations. It has taken time for these changes to occur, but as shown in the readings, there have been huge changes from the 1950’s to the present.

The approach of this study will take the epistemological position and a qualitative research design. Humphries (2008) asserts that qualitative research focusses on the subjective and recognises that the researcher will affect the data that is produced and therefore the outcome of the research. Denzin & Lincoln (2005:3) state that “Qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings attempting to make sense of, or to interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them”. Quantitative research on the other hand, claims to be objective, removing the researcher’s views and values from the study. While traditionally quantitative data has been deemed to produce more reliable or valid data, it does not suffice to capture the complexities of the human experience as it assumes a positivist epistemology.

Interpretivist don’t favour structured interviews as they use s pre-set structure which then means that the interviewee can’t discuss what they believe is important to them, also by not having open-ended questions it doesn’t allow the interviewee to be able to express themselves in their own words. Whereas positivists favour structured interviews as they achieve their main goals of reliability, generalisability and representative. This is because there are standardised questions and answers which produce reliable data as other researchers will then be able to replicate the interview. Also there is already pre-coded responses which allows for the production of quantitative data, identifying and measuring behaviour patterns as well as establishing cause–and–effect relationships.

This subjectivity statement is presented to acknowledge the researcher’s related perspectives and experiences. This statement is intended to allow the reader to further consider the credibility of the study, while situating the researcher and the study in a particular context. In the tradition of constructivist grounded theory, the researcher’s perspectives and experiences as relating to the topic under study are an important, inextricable aspect of the research process (Charmaz, 2014).

Positivism and constructionism share many differences, but both perspectives have valid arguments, so this theme has become a very popular debate among sociologists. Before a person can claim the distinctions between the two, one must have a clear understanding of each individual theory. The text states, “Each perspective suggests how to define deviance, but reveals through the definition what subject to study, what method to use for the study, and what kind of theory to use to make sense of the subject.” (p.4) I will explore each theory and the differences between positivism and constructionism.

However, critics to the positivist/ managerialist view argue that since people are involved in the activities or organizations, a better understanding of the reality of organizations is only acquired through qualitative research and evaluation of actual experiences. They believe that organization reality should not be isolated from actors, as it is these actors and the interaction between them that socially forms the realities (Uduoma and Silva, 2015).

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

Mills next discusses objectivism. This suggests the independence of what we choose and what we believe. Within objectivism, there is realism and constructivism. Starting with realism, it can be defined as viewing that it is objectively the case that there are human races. For instance, we know that there are multiple and specific human races attached to human beings. Digging deeper on the meaning, constructivism

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.

Research methodology and methodological approaches that is, the structured process of conducting research and the overall concepts and theories which underpin research respectively (Bryman, 2008), occupy a central position in the research process as they are both shaped by and translate the researcher’s epistemological position. Epistemology then refers to a researcher’s philosophical stance about the nature, derivation and scope of knowledge (Gilbert, 2008). These positions are seldom ‘spelt out’ but rather understood in the matter of research methodology and approach (Sarantakos, 2005).

Constructivism is the learning theory that focuses on observation by acquiring data and thereafter reexamining, altering, and updating information to be useful in the present time. Humans process experiences, knowledge, and conception of life based on their impressions of their past. As individuals experience an unfamiliar event, they will attempt to integrate it with their knowledge and past, therefore replacing old outdated or incorrect data with new more pertinent information (Kerka, 1997). This learning theory states that learning is an ongoing process and not about merely comprehending available data without questioning, processing, and updating previously learned information (Allen, 2005).

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 is a theoretical point of view which concentrates on social facts, scientific methods and quantitative data. The research methods that are commonly used by positivists are questionnaires, structured interviews, structured non-participant observation and official statistics. These methods are used as they are objective and reliable. One sociological study that used positivist methods was Durkheim’s Suicide Study. Durkheim used official statistics to study suicide and demonstrate society as a science with its own distinct subject matter.

Positivism is the scientific paradigm, which is the representative of objectivity. This paradigm supports that knowledge comes through a series of steps, such as observation of the nature, forming a hypothesis and then testing the hypothesis through experiments and statistics. In this way, researchers can provide a more accurate view of the truth and prevent generalization. No personal experiences and subjective opinions are involved. In most of the cases, positivism is based on a quantitative research method, which means that the results of the research are verified by numbers and not

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.