Public Administration/Sociology/MISOC: Summary of reading material and lectures
2.6 - Qualitative Methods
Part 1: Frameworks and assumptions
1) Creswell & Poth chapter 2: Philosophical Assumptions and Interpretive
Frameworks
Qualitative methods (QM) are used to analyse, amongst others, documents and visual data.
The foundations of these methods are made up by philosophical assumptions, abstract
ideas and beliefs on the base paradigms of which we form our research. These assumptions
are based on the perspectives and experiences that the researcher brings to their research,
and continue to shape research designs developed later in the process. Philosophy, after all,
is rather important in social studies, as it influences the direction of research goals and
outcomes, the scope of methods used and the basis of evaluative criteria, among others.
Four major philosophical assumptions exist:
1. Ontology: the researcher’s view on reality and existence. Within QM, the major
ontological perception is that multiple realities exist through different points of view.
Researchers, therefore, may report different perspectives as themes develop in their
findings.
2. Epistemology: the researcher’s view on (what counts as) knowledge and the way
reality is known, as well as on the relationship between researcher and subject.
Within QM, the major epistemological perception is that knowledge is based on
subjective experiences of people and that subjective evidence can be obtained from
participants. Therefore, researchers often spend time with participants to become
‘insiders’.
3. Axiology: the values taken on by the researcher within their research, and the
researcher’s view on what role values should take within research. Within QM,
multiple strong views on axiology exist. Creswell and Poth claim that research is
inherently value-laden, and that values should be explicated and reflected upon
within research. Because of this, values and the researcher’s own interpretations are
often explicated within papers.
4. Methodology: the procedures and methods used in research. Within QM, these may
be inductive as well as deductive. Topics are often studied within context, which
means that research design used in QM is often emergent, inductive and adaptive to
the context. Researchers often work with particulars before generalizations and put a
lot of focus into describing the research context.
Interpretative frameworks, then, are sets of philosophical assumptions at the basis of
research that include views on ontology, epistemology, axiology and methodology. Major
interpretative frameworks include the following:
- Postpositivism, aimed at the discovering and unveiling of reality. Often used by
researchers with prior quantitative research training, who tend to work in rigorous
ways and report the systematics behind procedures for data collection and analysis.
● Ontology: a single reality exists, but we may not be able to perfectly
understand it through research.
, ● Epistemology: reality can be approximated and revealed through research,
observation and statistics. Objectivity is needed, which means that interaction
with subjects should be limited. Validity can be gained from peers in the
scientific community.
● Axiology: biases should be controlled or dropped, so values are not explicated
in papers.
● Methodology: deductive and rigorous methods are needed to guarantee
objectivity.
- Social constructivism: or a weak version of postmodernism. Used by researchers
who recognize how context shapes interpretation to understand the world in which
they live and work. They interpret participant constructions through their own
accounts.
● Ontology: multiple realities exist, which are constructed through social
experiences and interactions.
● Epistemology: knowledge and realities are constructed within research
through interaction between researcher and subject, through individual
experiences.
● Axiology: individual values are honored and negotiated between individuals
involved with research.
● Methodology: aimed at reconstructing the subjective meaning of the subject
under study. Research is carried out within a context, or, in other words, in the
field.
- Postmodernism, or the hard version of social constructivism. Used by researchers
who understand the conditions of the modern world to change the way in which we
think, by using their research to highlight the multiplicity of perspectives.
● Ontology: multiple realities exist, which are defined by our experiences and
the concepts that we use. No hard or brute facts exist beyond this.
● Epistemology: knowledge is defined by used concepts, relevant power
structures as well as one’s position. There are multiple ways of ‘knowing’,
truth is only relevant within the frame of reference used within this process.
● Axiology: multiple value systems exists, some of which are indigenous to
certain groups. These values need to be problematized and interrogated
within research.
● Methodology: methods are always questioned and the absolute truth cannot
be found. Transparency is stressed through highlighting issues and concerns,
so that peers can question your methods.
- Transformative or emancipatory research, aimed at changing society. Compare this
to postmodernity, which only tries to change thinking. A clear subcategory of
transformative research is feminist theory, although this borders into the territory of
critical theory as well. Used by researchers with knowledge of power and social
relationships to act for societal improvements by adopting an agenda for addressing
the issues and injustices of marginalized groups.
● Ontology: multiple realities exist, which are defined through interaction
between researchers and their communities.
● Epistemology: knowledge is not neutral, but is influenced by power structures.
Knowledge is co-created between researcher and subject.
, ● Axiology: multiple value systems exists, some of which are indigenous to
certain groups. These values need to be problematized and interrogated
within research.
● Methodology: participation of subjects should be encouraged, as knowledge
is constructed within interaction between researchers and subjects.
- Pragmatism. Used by researchers with appreciation for diverse approaches to and
methods for research to find solutions to real-world problems. These researchers
employ the most appropriate research methods for the problem at hand.
● Ontology: pragmatism is characterized by indifference on the nature of reality.
An effective view on reality that is coherent with the research question under
study is employed.
● Epistemology: knowledge is developed through research questions. The way
knowledge is gained depends on the research question under study.
● Axiology: values are only discussed if they influence the results of research.
This discussion must always realize a certain goal, such as publicity.
● Methodology: depends on the research question under study, as well as on
available resources. Pragmatists often employ mixed methods.
- Critical theory, or research aimed at making a call for social justice, which also tries
to change the world by addressing areas of inequities with the goal of empowering
humans. Axiology is central to this framework. Examples are critical race theory, but
also queer theory, feminist theory and disability theory.
● Ontology: multiple realities exist, which are defined through one’s position of
power, identity, gender, social standing, etcetera.
● Epistemology: knowledge is defined by ‘one’s world’, as described above.
● Axiology: the diversity of values is and should be emphasized.
● Methodology: methods should be aimed at identifying the structures that
institutionalize social injustice. These structures should be documented, on
the basis of which researches ought to call for societal change. The actual
research methods employed here vary wildly.
Within QM, interpretative frameworks may choose to view the world through either a
theoretical lens, which stresses epistemology and methodology and tries to acquire a
theoretical understanding of reality, or a social justice lens, which stresses axiology and tries
to change the world or address social issues. Most of the frameworks described above fall
under the former category, but critical theory (including feminist, queer, disability and race
theory) is part of the social justice lens. The way these frameworks are used varies and
depends on both the framework and the research. Once we can distinguish between
interpretative frameworks, it may become easier to see how they are used in practice.
Mainly, these differences lie in what the frameworks try to accomplish. Frameworks and
philosophical assumptions may be explicated within the methodology section of a paper, but
if not, the reader will need a keen eye to discern these.
