Related Info Links
More by Authors Links
News and Announcements
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Approaches in Scientific Research Methods and Phılosophical Dilemmas: Paradigm Wars
Show Less
1 Kırgızistan-Türkiye Manas Üniversitesi, Edebiyat Fakültesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Bölümü 720044, Bişkek , Kırgızistan
Received: 8 March 2023 | Published online: 20 September 2023
© 2023 by the Authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution -Noncommercial 4.0 International License (CC-by the license) ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ )
Abstract
All research is based on some basic assumptions about how good research is done and which research method is appropriate. It is important to be aware of these assumptions in conducting any research. The unjustified use of approaches with very different understandings of reality in the same study casts a shadow over the seriousness of the research. Because it guides scientific research through research paradigms, assumptions and principles. This study focuses on the research paradigm by examining the basic assumptions of Positivism, Naturalism and Pragmatism (ontology, epistemology, axiology and methodology). The main purpose of the study is to show researchers that when choosing a method, they also adopt a philosophical tradition and that they must act in accordance with this tradition during the study process. As a result, researchers conducting scientific research need to know that they are also choosing a belief and worldview when determining a method. A researcher who determines a method suitable for the quantitative approach should know that he also accepts that reality is knowable and generalizable in accordance with the positivist tradition. On the other hand, a researcher who conducts a study in accordance with the qualitative approach must know that he/she complies with the naturalist interpretive tradition that emphasizes that reality is more than one or uncertain.
Keywords
Scientific research
research philosophy
positivism
naturalism
pragmatism.
References
- Antwi, S. K., & Hamza, K. (2015). Qualitative and Quantitative Research Paradigms in Business Research: A Philosophical Reflection. European Journal of Business and Management, 7 (3), 217-226.
- Aumann, R. J. (2011). Pure science and applied science. Rambam Maimonides Medical Journal, 2 (1), 1-3. https://doi.org/10.5041/RMMJ.10017
- Bentley, P. J., Gulbrandsen, M., & Kyvik, S. (2016). The Relationship Between Basic and Applied Research in Universities. Higher Education, 70, 689-709.
- Berger, K., & Luckman, T. (1991). The Social Construction of Reality. Penguin Books.
- Braa, K., & Vidgen, R. (1999). Interpretation, Intervention, and Reduction in the Organizational Laboratory: A Framework for In-Context Information System Research. Accounting, Management & Information Technology, 9, 25-47.
- Bryman, A. (2001). Social Research Methods. Oxford University Press.
- Burns, N., & Grove, S. K. (2007). Understanding Nursing Research: Building an Evidence-Based Practice. Saunders Elsevier Press.
- Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis. Heinemann Educational Books.
- Crotty, M. (1998). The Foundations of Social Research. Sage Publication.
- Douglas, H. (2014). Pure Science and the Problem of Progress. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 46, 55-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2014.02.001
- Edwards, P. (1967). The encyclopedia of philosophy The Philosophical Quarterly, 18 (70), 68–69. https://doi.org/10.2307/2218031
- Fomunyam, K. G. (2020). Pure and Applied Research as the Epicenter of Research in Engineering Education. International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology, 13 (9). https://dx.doi.org/10.37624/IJERT/13.9.2020.2402-2408
- Gaarder, J. (1994). Sophies World: A Novel About the History of Philosphy. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
- Goldkuhl, G. (2012). Pragmatism vs Interpretivism in Qualitative Information Systems Research. European Journal of Information Systems, 21, 135-146.
- Gouldner, A. W. (1970). The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology. Basic Books.
- Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1994). Competing Paradigms in Qualitative Research. In Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, 105-117.
- Hansson, S. O. (2007). Values in Pure and Applied Science. Foundations of science, 12, 257-268.
- Hospers, J. (1961). An Introduction to Philosophical Analysis. Routledge and Kegan Paul.
- Hossain, F. A. (2014). A Critical Analysis of Empiricism. Open Journal of Philosophy, 4 (3), 225-230. 10.4236/ojpp.2014.43030
- Howe, K. R. (1988). Against the Quantitative-Qualitative Incompatibility Thesis or Dogmas Die Hard. Educational researcher, 17 (8), 10-16.
- Kitcher, P. (2004). On the Autonomy of the Sciences. Philosophy Today, 48, 51-57.
- Kuchta, D., Gladysz, B., Skowron, D., & Betta, J. (2017). R & D Projects in the Science Sector. R&D Management, 47 (1), 88-110.
- Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
- Kuhn, T. S. (2012). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago press.
- Lee, A. S., & Nickerson, J. V. (2010). Theory as a Case of Design: Lessons for Design from the Philosophy of Science. 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Koloa, Kauai, Hawaii: January 5-8.
- Markie, P., & Folescu, M. (2004). Rationalism vs. Empiricism. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rationalism-empiricism/
- Mauthner, N. S. (2020). Research Philosophies and Why They Matter. In Townsend, K., Saunders, M., Loudoun, R. & Morrison, E. (Eds) How to Keep your Doctorate on Track. Edward Elgar Publishing, 76-86
- Morgan, G., & Smircich, L. (1980). The Case for Qualitative Research. Academy of Management Review, 5 (4), 491-500.
- Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2005). On Becoming a Pragmatic Researcher: The Importance of Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methodologies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8 (5), 375-387.
- Polanyi, M. (1956). Pure and Applied Science and their Appropriate Forms of Organization. Dialectica, 231-242.
- Pugh, D. S., Hickson, D. J., Hinings, C. R., & Turner, C. (1969). The Context of Organization Structures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14 (1), 91-114. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391366
- Roll-Hansen, N. (2017). A Historical Perspective on the Distinction Between Basic and Applied Science. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 48 (4), 535-551.
- Rossman, G. B., & Wilson, B. L. (1985). Numbers and Words: Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Methods in a Single Large-scale Evaluation Study. Evaluation Review, 9 (5), 627-643.
- Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2011). Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data. Sage Publication
- Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2007). Research Methods for Business Students. FT Prentice Hall.
- Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Understanding Research Philosophies and Approaches. Pearson Education Limited.
- Sheikheldin, G., & Nyichomba, B. (2019). Engineering Education, Development and Growth in Africa. Scientific African, 6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2019.e00200
- Stern, A. W. (1945). Response: Pure Science. Science, 101 (2611), 38-39, 10.1126/science.101.2611.38.
- Warren, C. A. (2002). Qualitative Interviewing. In Gubrium, J. F. & Holstein, J. A. (Eds), Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method, Thousand Oaks, Sage Publication, 83-101.
- Ziman, J. M. (1987). An Introduction to Science Studies: The Philosophical and Social Aspects of Science and Technology. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511608360