Positivism Vs Interpretivism Essay

3.2 Research Design

Positivism vs Interpretivism

Positivism (http://www.dissertation.lib-ebook.com/d-history/2790729-1-chapter three-research-methodology-introduction-the-way-which.php)

Positivists is believe that reality is constant and observable and describable from an objective viewpoint (Levin, 1988), i.e. Study of phenomena without interfered. Positivists should repeat the isolated phenomenon and observations. This frequently includes control of reality with varieties in just a solitary autonomous variable in order to distinguish regularities in, and to frame connections between, percentage of the constituent components of the social world. (dissertation.lib, 2015)

Interpretivism (http://www.dissertation.lib-ebook.com/d-history/2790729-1-chapter-three-research-methodology-introduction-the-way-which.php)

In short, ontology describes our view (whether claims or assumptions) on the nature of reality, and specifically, is this an objective reality that really exists, or only a subjective reality, created in our minds. Hatch and Cunliffe (2006) use both an everyday example, and a social science example to illustrate the point. For the everyday example, they use the example of a workplace report – asking one to question whether it describes what is really going on, or only what the author thinks is going on. They go on to highlight the complexity that is introduced when considering phenomena such as culture, power or control, and whether they really exist or are simply an illusion, further extending the discussion as to how individuals (and groups) determine these realities – does the reality exist only through experience of it (subjectivism), or does it exist independently of those who live it (objectivism). As a result, we all have a number of deeply embedded ontological assumptions which will affect our view on what is real and whether we attribute existence to one set of things over another. If these underlying assumptions are not identified and considered, the researcher may be blinded to certain aspects

Questions of epistemology begin to consider the research method, and Eriksson and Kovalainen go on to discuss how epistemology defines how knowledge can be produced and argued for. Blaikie (1993) describes epistemology as ‘the theory or science of the method or grounds of knowledge’ expanding this into a set of claims or assumptions about the ways in which it is possible to gain knowledge of reality, how what exists may be known, what can be known, and what criteria must be satisfied in order to be described as knowledge. Chia (2002) describes epistemology as ‘how and what it is possible to know’ and the need to reflect on methods and standards through which reliable and verifiable knowledge is produced and Hatch and Cunliffe (2006) summarise epistemology as ‘knowing how you can know’ and expand this by asking how is knowledge generated, what criteria discriminate good knowledge from bad knowledge, and how should reality be represented or described. They go on to highlight the inter-dependent relationship between epistemology and ontology, and how one both informs, and depends upon, the other. In considering this link, the need to understand the