Philosophical Paradigms in Qualitative Research Methods Education: What is their Pedagogical Role?

Figures & data

Table 1. A classic example of paradigmatic claims (Lincoln et al., 2018, p. 111)

Type of Belief	Positivism	Postpositivsm	Critical theory et al.	Constructivism	Participatory
Ontological	Naïve Realism – “real” reality but apprehendible	Critical realism – “real” reality but only imperfectly and probabilistically apprehendible	Historical realism – virtual reality shaped by social, political, cultural, economic, ethnic and gender values; crystallized over time	Relativism – local and specific co-constructed realities	Participative reality – subjective-objective reality, co-created by mind and given cosmos
Epistemological	Dualist objectivist; findings true	Modified dualist/objectivist; critical tradition/community; findings probably true	Transactional/subjectivist; value-mediated findings	Transactional/subjectivist; co-created findings	Critical subjectivity in participatory transaction with cosmos; extended epistemology of experiential, propositional, and practical knowing; co-created findings
Methodological	Experimental/manipulative; verification of hypotheses; chiefly quantitative methods	Modified experimental/manipulative; critical mutiplism; falsification of hypotheses; may include qualitative methods	Dialogic/dialectical	Hermeneutical/dialectical	Political participation in collaborative action inquiry; primacy of the practical, use of language grounded in shared experiential context

Table 2. A sample of citations about the relationship between philosophy and methods from qualitative research methods textbooks.

Reference	Quote	pp.	Code
Alvesson and Sköldberg (2018)	“In our view it is not methods but ontology and epistemology which are the determinants of good social research.”	9	X
Bazeley (2013)	“Analysis is laid on the foundation of our understanding about how the world works, what makes it what it is (ontology); and of how we, as human beings, can understand and learn about that world and especially about the world of people (epistemology). For example, our understanding of the nature of reality and truth and whether we discover, interpret, or construct realities and truths influence our choices of topic, methods, and conclusions. Although these foundations may remain implicit rather than explicit, thinking about them sharpens and enriches our analysis, and our understanding of these things impacts on how we assess the trustworthiness of our conclusions.”	1	G
Brinkmann (2017)	“In many contemporary applications of CAQDAS—that is, computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software—often developed along the line of grounded theory methodology, there are inbuilt presuppositions that resemble positivism. The idea that data are in principle separable from the contexts in which they were produced, from the persons producing them, and from theoretical frameworks that are used to make sense of them seems to apply to many uses of CAQDAS.”	60	E
Bryman (2016)	“questions of social ontology cannot be divorced from issues concerning the conduct of social research. Ontological assumptions and commitments will feed into the ways in which research questions are formulated and research is carried out.”	30	G
Corbin and Strauss (2015)	“Probably most researchers who use our methodology (and certainly those who use only its procedures) have not reflected upon the assumptions that underlie the method presented in this book. Perhaps they assume that methodology evolves strictly from practice. Though it does to some degree, it is also considerably influenced by worldview, or the beliefs and attitudes about the world we live in.”	5	G
Creswell and Poth (2017)	“The research design process in qualitative research begins with philosophical assumptions that the inquirers make in deciding to undertake a qualitative study. […] Five philosophical assumptions lead to an individual’s choice of qualitative research: ontology, epistemology, axiology, rhetorical, and methodological assumptions. The qualitative researcher chooses a stance on each of these assumptions, and the choice has practical implications for designing and conducting research.”	15	G
Denzin and Lincoln (2018)	See section 3.2 on explanation.	Ch.5	G
Ellingson (2009)	“[Qualitative research] Eschew positivist claims to objectivity and a singular, discoverable Truth in favor of embracing knowledge as situated, partial, constructed, multiple, embodied, and enmeshed in power relations.”	8	G
Flick (2014)	“the theory of qualitative research is characterized by three perspectives, each with distinctive implications for the research methods do be used. These perspectives may be characterized in terms of basic assumptions.”	52	G
Hammersley (2012)	“This chapter will look at some of the philosophical ideas that have shaped the practice and development of qualitative research, and that continue to do so. These ideas, which relate to the nature of the social world (ontology), how knowledge of it is possible (epistemology), and to the purpose(s) of inquiry (which might be seen as an aspect of politics), can be complex and difficult.”	21	G
Lapan et al. (2012)	“The process of data collection varies depending on which scientific paradigm the researcher prefers.”	69	G
Lichtman (2013)	A table similar to tab.1 is presented on p. 9.	9	G
Lune and Berg (2017)	“methods impose certain perspectives on reality. For example, when researchers canvass a neighborhood and arrange interviews with residents to discuss some social problem, a theoretical assumption has already been made -specifically, that reality is fairly constant and stable, and that people can reliably observe and describe it.”	14	G
Lyons and Coyle (2016)	“[D]ifferent research approaches and methods are based on different philosophical assumptions concerning how we should produce psychological knowledge and what can be known and have different scientific goals and guidelines for good practice […].” “Researchers may have a favored epistemological position and may locate their research within this, choosing methods that accord with that position (or that can be made to accord with it).”	4, 12	G
Maxwell (2012)	The book is an argument for using a philosophical theory (critical realism) as a guide for qualitative research.	Preface	G
Merriam (2015)	“The qualitative, interpretive, or naturalistic research paradigm defines the methods and techniques most suitable for collecting and analyzing data.”	2	G
Miles et al. (2014)	“We […] don't think that good qualitative analysis necessarily calls for formal prerequisites (e.g., long ethnographic experience, knowledge of scientific logic, and a deep background in philosophy, ontology and epistemology). […] Working without them, at least initially, is not fatal.”	341	N
Packer (2010)	“Rather than paying attention to ontological and epistemological assumptions, we should look at the practices actually engaged in by communities of researchers […]. But an important point of Kuhn’s analysis was that practices and ontological and epistemological commitments are not separate. His view was that scientific practices require and embody such commitments: they are commitments made in practice.”	40	X
Patton (2015)	“It is not necessary, in my opinion, to swear vows of allegiance to any single epistemological perspective to use qualitative methods. […] There is a very practical side to qualitative methods that simply involves asking open-ended questions […]. In short, in real-world practice, methods can be separated from the epistemology out of which they have emerged.”	89–90	N
Roller and Lavrakas (2015)	“[Our approach focuses] on issues related to methodological choices that researchers make […] in their efforts to generate data that are fit for the purpose for which a study is intended. [Our approach] also focuses on issues related to the choices that qualitative researchers make […] in their efforts to makes sense of […] the data that their studies generate. It does not focus on any theoretical paradigm that might guide qualitative researchers in deciding how to identify and formulate the questions they seek to answer with their research or how to make their findings useful.”	20	N
Schutt (2018)	“Scientific paradigms are sets of beliefs that guide scientific work in an area.”	37	G
Wertz (2011)	“One of the most exciting and challenging dimensions of the qualitative movement is its common consensus that philosophy matters and is relevant to empirical research with humans. […] [A]ll research makes basic philosophical assumptions about existence (ontology), knowledge (epistemology), value (axiology), and the good (ethics).”	79–80	G
Willig (2013)	“I have proposed that every qualitative research project is informed by a research question (about human experience, about the construction of meaning, about social and/or psychological processes, etc.) which is itself based upon some assumptions about the world and about people. These assumptions can be described as ontological. Every research question also makes assumptions about knowledge, about what can be known and how."	19	G

Lincoln, Y. S., Lynham, S. A., & Guba, E. G. (2018). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, revisited. In Y. S. Lincoln, & N. K. Denzin (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research, 5t. h ed. (pp. 108–150). SAGE.

 Google Scholar

Alvesson, M., & Sköldberg, K. (2018). Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research (3rd ed.). SAGE.

 Google Scholar

Bazeley, P. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: Practical strategies. SAGE.

 Google Scholar

Brinkmann, S. (2017). Philosophies of qualitative research. Oxford University Press.

 Google Scholar

Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.

 Google Scholar

Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. L. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

 Google Scholar

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2017). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.

 Google Scholar

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). Sage.

 Google Scholar

Ellingson, L. L. (2009). Engaging crystallization in qualitative research: An introduction. Sage Publications.

 Google Scholar

Flick, U. (2014). An introduction to qualitative research (5th ed.). SAGE.

 Google Scholar

Hammersley, M. (2012). What is Qualitative Research? Bloomsbury Publishing.

 Google Scholar

Lapan, S. D., Quartaroli, M. T., & Riemer, F. J. (2012). Qualitative research: An introduction to methods and designs. Jossey-Bass.

 Google Scholar

Lichtman, M. (2013). Qualitative research in education: A user’s guide (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.

 Google Scholar

Lune, H., & Berg, B. L. (2017). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (9th ed.). Pearson.

 Google Scholar

Lyons, E., & Coyle, A. (2016). Analysing qualitative data in psychology (2nd ed.). SAGE.

 Google Scholar

Maxwell, J. A. (2012). A realist approach for qualitative research. SAGE Publications.

 Google Scholar

Merriam, S. B. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.

 Google Scholar

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage.

 Google Scholar

Packer, M. (2010). The science of qualitative research. Cambridge University Press.

 Google Scholar

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.

 Google Scholar

Roller, M. R., & Lavrakas, P. J. (2015). Applied qualitative research design: A total quality framework approach. Guilford Press.

 Google Scholar

Schutt, R. K. (2018). Investigating the social world: The process and practice of research (9th ed.). SAGE Publications.

 Google Scholar

Wertz, F. J. (2011). Five ways of doing qualitative analysis: Phenomenological psychology, grounded theory, discourse analysis, narrative research, and intuitive inquiry. Guilford Press.

 Google Scholar

Willig, C. (2013). Introducing qualitative research in psychology (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill International.

 Google Scholar