Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Different research methodologies
Different research methodologies
Different research methodologies
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Different research methodologies
Research philosophies
Research philosophies is a framework by which the research problem should be fundamentally approached, there are four major research philosophies positivism, interpretivism/constructivism, realism and pragmatism (Davies, 2007). Positivism is a philosophical trend in the methodology of science, defining the only source of true, actual knowledge of empirical research and denies cognitive value of philosophical inquiry. According to the positivist philosophy, methodology is not related to the essence of knowledge about the real world, but rather has to do with the operations by which knowledge is constructed. The essential reasoning behind positivism is that, all truthful learning depends on the positive data assembled from noticeable experience, and that any thought past this domain of self evident actuality is powerful. Just explanatory proclamations are permitted to be known as valid, through reason alone (Davies 2007).
Interpretivism is a view that trusts that the world and the truth are not target and outer, but rather are socially built and given importance by individuals. This view is normally alluded to as the subjective approach and depends on an inductive system (Rea and Parker, 2006).(why
…show more content…
The benefits of utilizing contextual analysis include: the point by point perceptions encompassing the contextual analysis technique, permit us to examine a wide range of parts, investigate them in connection to each other, see the procedure with its aggregate surroundings furthermore use the analyst's ability for flexibility. Subsequently, contextual analysis gives us a more noteworthy prospect than other accessible techniques to acquire a comprehensive perspective of a particular research; it is not necessarily the case that examines in light of contextual analysis have no
Based on the preceding ontological and epistemological assumptions a researcher then makes methodological assumptions. Having decided on exactly what is to be studied the researcher then decides how the research can best be managed thus formulating a plan of action. Considerations include whether the research used should be primary or secondary. Whether one will test an existing hypothesis or whether one will construct a theory after having collated evidence. Finally one can draw conclusions as to which strategy to implement with the ultimate goal of producing the type of knowledge that is required. This then results in the type of method or methods of research to be used.
The theoretical framework in a research relates to the philosophical basis in which the research is executed. It also forms the link between the theoretical aspect of the research and the practical aspect of the investigation. Merten (1998) stated that it “has implications for every decision made in the research process” (p.3). Therefore, the starting point to any research proposal is to identify the methodologies (methods that can be used in the project and as well justify their choice (Crotty, 1998). The methodologies relate to “the strategy, plan of action, processes or design lying behind the choice and use of particular methods, and linking the choice and use of methods to the desired outcomes” (Crotty, 1998, p. 3).
Reflection usually means reflecting on an experience usually a bad experience that requires the practitioner to stop and evaluate the best way forward. Leeson (2010) suggests practitioners to 'feel' their work as opposed to just observing. This can challenge practice and knowledge and hopefully give greater understanding. However, reflection requires the practitioner to question their own professional practice and as such this self knowledge is not an easy option. As Crowley (2009:4) states practitioner research may well:
No matter what the topic is, which whether it’s a practical or very unusual, a case study can supply very descriptive, qualitative information. With using this method and collecting all this information, one becomes very knowledgeable of the subject, which makes it easier for the researcher to connect with their work. By the connection made between the subject and researcher, the researcher will then have a different in-depth perception of the case. Finally, while this method has its disadvantages, the case study method proves to present a unique platform for a variety of studies that create remarkable insights into areas of analysis versus all the other research
Interpretive perspective says that the social world is created in an ongoing manner, via social interaction. How do we relate to each other on a day-to-day basis? It focuses upon micro-level.
In the reality, everyone is in contact with research either conducting a research or consuming a research. However, only scholar-practitioner meet the criteria of developing certain research problematical awkward such as “How do you know you doing good?” when the scholar practitioners bring the skepticism attitude to the arena, they assert the evidence not only claims. The mind set of scholar-practitioner, is the inquiry to distinguish the bad from the wrong. Additionally, research about the study of the world as a result failure is excluded from the concept of research to prove that your methods are wrong means that you proved something and this knowledge, moreover this the task of
This paper will provide a hypothetical discussion of how each of the four “worldviews” (post-positivism, constructivism, advocacy/participatory, and pragmatism) might apply to the proposed study. It will refer to the topic paper developed during the class RSH9101B (Research Topic, Problem, Purpose, and Questions) with the assistance of Dr. Kenneth Gossett, class mentor. The portion of the Topic Paper to be used will be the problem statement, which will provide the foundation for this discussion and completion of this assignment. This discussion ultimately will lead to the strengthening of this research and the understanding for the need of better researches to help today’s virtual organizations.
My research philosophy is driven by informed inquiry to search for answers to questions that can enrich understanding and benefit society. I believe in integrating fundamentals from science with engineering principles in searching for practical answers. This theoretical and empirical approach guides my own research. My current research at Purdue University is focused on the handling issues faced by the corn ethanol industry and specifically on studying the caking behavior of corn distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS). I am using basic and applied research principles to investigate the conditions at which this granular bulk product cakes. Results from this study will be used to develop a quality control management system for DDGS during production and transportation. A model that I developed, to predict the moisture sorption of behavior from the DDGS chemical composition[ ], can be coupled with a near infra-red (NIR) instrument, that is commonly used by the corn ethanol industry for quantifying the chemical composition. My active involvement with a team of researchers who studied the effect of process variables during drying on the physical and chemical variability in DDGS at a commercial corn ethanol plant, gave me valuable insights on validating a hypothesis at an industrial scale.
Many sociologists come to a disagreement and different approaches to the Sociological concept of positivism and antipositivism. Positivism is the scientific study of social patterns. This pertains to the use of scientific methods to get a more clear understanding of the natural world. Auguste Comte was the founder of this concept. Comte believed the way that society interacts with individuals using positivism would usher in a new “positivist” age of history. Comte concept of positivism is still relevant today. Since then positivism has been expanded and became the foundation for quantitative sociology. Quantitative sociology is the use of empirical evidence to gain an understanding of human patterns and behavior.
Positivism Paradigm is considered the “scientific method”; Interpretivist Paradigm approaches understanding using the world of “human experience”. Critical and Transformative researchers "believe that inquiry needs to be intertwined with politics and a political agenda" (Creswell, 2003, p.9). Pragmatism theorists are not committed to any specific system of philosophy or model that use the most relevant theory applicable to their research. Understanding paradigms is essential to preparing for dissertation research. Paradigms provide a framework to write and explain my philosophies, accurately support the data compiled and structure the narrative research. Selecting the paradigm will determine if the research will include qualitative data, quantitative data or a mixed method which will incorporate a blended method approach. Choosing an incorrect approach can lead to research flaws and
Research is systematic way to find out facts and knowledge as Kothari (2006) has analyzed that research is the pursuit of truth with the help of study, observation, comparison and experiment; the search for knowledge through objective and systematic method of finding solutions to a problem. However there are two types of researches one is by Purpose and other is by method. The type by purpose falls into three categorize such as Basic, Applied and Action Research.
Primary source data collection relies on structured interviews and questionnaires, which many argue do not offer enough fluidity to relate to everyday lives and therefore are not valid research tools (Bryman 2001, p.77). Critics also continue to associate positivism and quantitative methods failing to see that quantitative researchers do not apply the scientific method to all data and can account for influencing variables (Bryman 2001, p.77; Matthews and Ross 2010, p.29). Quantitative methods in the social sciences were highlighted by the positivist epistemology during the mid 20th century; however, Jones (2010) explains how the principles of positivist epistemology are not fully consistent with modern quantitative methods in the social sciences (Matthews and Ross 2010, p.27). Positivist research parallels that of the natural sciences, where data collection and hypothesis testing is conducted from information that can be observed and recorded by the senses (Matthews and Ross 2010, p.27). Because information can only be observed, positivists look for regularities and explain causation when one event regularly follows another, which is why many will criticize quantitative methods if they associate them with the positivist approach to research (Jones
The ontology of positivism is that the world is external , which can only be studied by observation and measurement. So positivists believe that reality is stable and can be observed and described from an objective viewpoint. After the scientific revolution of social science in 1960s, more and more social scientists thought that social sciences can be built upon the same model as the natural sciences as well. Those scholars, in IR researchers, started using empirical methodology to analyze their subjects. Because in positivists eyes that social scientific inquiry should be objective and empirical, which with the goad of systematization of sociology. In the research field of international relations, quantitative study follows the logic of positivism. As Bruce Berg identified that quantitative research is a positivistic
Research philosophy, refers to the development of knowledge adopted by the researchers in their research (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). In other words, it is the theory that used to direct the researcher for conducting the procedure of research design, research strategy, questionnaire design and sampling (Malhotra, 2009). It is very important to have a clear understanding of the research philosophy so that we could examine the assumptions about the way we view the world, which are contained in the research philosophy we choose, knowing that whether they are appropriate or not (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). According to Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2009), three major ways of thinking about research philosophy are examined: ontology, epistemology and axiology. Each of them carries significant differences which will have an impact on the way we consider the research procedures. Ontology, “is concerned with nature of reality”, while epistemology “concerns what constitutes acceptable knowledge in a field of study and axiology “studies judgements about value” (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009, p110, p112, p116). This study is intent on creating some “facts” from objective evaluations which are made by the subjects. Therefore, epistemology will be chosen for this study as the way of thinking about the research philosophy.
Research which is also known as the search for knowledge is an art of scientific search for specific information. According to Clifford Woody, the research includes defining and redefining problems, formulating hypothesis and suggested solutions, collecting, organising and evaluating data, making deductions and reaching conclusion and further testing whether the conclusion will fit into formulating hypothesis. Research Methodology is a scientific and systematic way of finding solution to a problem. In this research, researcher has studied various steps for research like problem along with the logic behind them. For this study, researcher must know various research techniques like mean, mode,