Understanding Research Paradigms: A Scientific Guide

Authors

  • Wooi Keong Yong
  • Maizaitulaidawati Md Husin
  • Suzilawati Kamarudin

Keywords:

Paradigm, Research Methods, Interpretivism, Positivism, Critical Theory, Realism, Qualitative, Quantitative, Ontology, Epistemology, Methodology

Abstract

Knowledge of research paradigms is crucial as they guide scientific research and discoveries through their assumptions and principles. Besides, different disciplines utilise different research approaches. There are four different research paradigms available - positivism, realism, critical theory, and interpretivism. Knowledge of the various research paradigms will reduce research method bias and allow for better research instruments. This paper aims to highlight to budding researchers the research paradigms available and their employment in scientific research.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alharahsheh, H. and Pius, A. (2020). A review of key paradigms: Positivism vs. Interpretivism. Global Academic Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(3), 39- 43.

Biesta, G. (2010). Pragmatism and the philosophical foundations of mixed methods research. Sage handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research. 2, 95- 118.

Bailey, B. (2011). Case studies: A security science research methodology. DOI 10.4225/75/57a00c2eac5bf

Bogna, F., Raineri, A., and Dell, G. (2020). Critical realism and constructivism: merging research paradigms for a deeper qualitative study. Qualitative Research in Organisations and Management: An International Journal. 15(4), 461-484.

Carson, D., Gilmore, A., Perry, C., and Gronhaug, K. (2001). Qualitative Marketing Research. Sage.

Fitzgerald, B., and Howcroft, D. (1998). Competing dichotomies in IS research and possible strategies for resolution. ICIS 1998 Proceedings, 14.

Healy, M., and Perry, C. (2000). Comprehensive criteria to judge validity and reliability of qualitative research within the realism paradigm. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 3(3), 118-126.

Hudson, L. A., and Ozanne, J. L. (1988). Alternative ways of seeking knowledge in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(4), 508-521.

Hoyle, R. H., Harris, M. J., and Judd, C. M. (2009). Research Methods in Social Relations. NY: Wadsworth.

Hjørland, B. (2005). Empiricism, rationalism and positivism in library and information science. Journal of Documentation, 61(1), 130-155.

Irshaidat, R. (2019). Interpretivism vs. Positivism in Political Marketing Research.

Journal of Political Marketing, 1-35.

Igwenagu, C. (2016). Fundamentals of Research Methodology and Data Collection. Lambert Academic Publishing.

Littlejohn, S. W., and Foss, K. A. (2009). Encyclopedia of Communication Theory (Vol. 1). Sage: Thousand Oaks.

Mertens, D. M. (2012). What comes first? The paradigm or the approach? Journal of Mixed Method Research, 6(4), 255-257.

Park, Y. S., Konge, L., and Artino Jr, A. R. (2020). The positivism paradigm of research. Academic Medicine, 95(5), 690-694.

Pawlikowski, P., Rico, N., and Van Sell, S. (2018). Positivism: a concept analysis. Graphy Publications.

Scotland, J. (2012). Exploring the philosophical underpinnings of research: Relating ontology and epistemology to the methodology and methods of the scientific, interpretive, and critical research paradigms. English Language Teaching, 5(9), 9-16. Saunders, M., and Lewis, P. (2012). Doing research in Business & Management: An essential guide to planning your project. Pearson.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2012). Research Methods for Business Students. 6th Edition. Pearson.

Tashakkori, A., and Teddlie, C. (2003). Issues and dilemmas in teaching research methods courses in social and behavioural sciences: US perspective. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 6(1), 61-77.

Varpio, L., Paradis, E., Uijtdehaage, S., and Young, M. (2020). The distinctions between theory, theoretical framework, and conceptual framework. Academic Medicine, 95(7), 989-994.

Weber, R. (2004). Editor’s comments: the rhetoric of positivism versus interpretivism: a personal view. MIS Quarterly, 3-12.

Wynn Jr, D., and Williams, C. K. (2012). Principles for conducting critical realist case study research in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 36(3), 787-810.

Downloads

Published

2021-04-30

How to Cite

Yong, W. K. ., Husin, M. M. ., & Kamarudin, S. . (2021). Understanding Research Paradigms: A Scientific Guide. The Journal of Contemporary Issues in Business and Government, 27(2), 5857–5865. Retrieved from https://cibgp.com/au/index.php/1323-6903/article/view/1481

Issue

Vol. 27 No. 2 (2021): The journal of contemporary issues in business and government

Section

Articles

License

You are free to:

  1. Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
  2. Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
  3. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.

Under the following terms:

  1. Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
  2. No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

Notices:

You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .

No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.