Research Philosophy PDF

PHILOSOPHY IN RESEARCH Supriyo Roy  TOPICS TO COVER 2  1. RESEARCH - WHAT ACTUALLY MEANS?  2. RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES 2.1 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES: PRAGMATISM 2.2 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES: POSITIVISM 2.3 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES: INTERPRETIVISM 2.4 PHI...

PHILOSOPHY IN RESEARCH Supriyo Roy  TOPICS TO COVER 2  1. RESEARCH - WHAT ACTUALLY MEANS?  2. RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES 2.1 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES: PRAGMATISM 2.2 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES: POSITIVISM 2.3 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES: INTERPRETIVISM 2.4 PHILOSOPHIES VS. STRATEGIES  3.1RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES: REALISM  3.2 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES: ONTOLOGY  3.3 RESEARCH PARADIGMS  3.4 COMPARISON OF PHILOSOPHIES  4. CONCLUSION  5. TIME HORIZONS  6. CREDIBILITY OF RESEARCH FINDINGS  7. DATA COLLECTION  8. COLLECTING PRIMARY DATA THROUGH QUESTIONNAIRES 1. RESEARCH - WHAT ACTUALLY MEANS? 3  Research is described as ‘something people undertake to find out things systematically, thereby increasing the knowledge domain’.  Words important in the above definition are ‘systematic way’ and ‘to find out things’. ‘Systematic way’ suggests that research is based on logical relationships and not just beliefs (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2005).  As a part of the above, research will involve explaining methods used to collect data and arguing to get answers to questions’ like ‘why results obtained are meaningful?’ ‘ to what extent?’, etc. It will explain ‘any associated limitations’.  ‘To find out things’ suggests multiple possible purposes, including describing, explaining, understanding, criticizing and analyzing the facts and figures (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2005).  RESEARCH - WHAT ACTUALLY MEANS? 4  Any research targeted to areas related to Decision Making warrants the following characteristics: 1. Using knowledge from any domain of disciplines enables research to gain new insights that cannot be obtained through all of these disciplines individually, and 2. It should be highlighted in critic is a belief that it should be able to develop new ideas and ultimately relate them to practice.  In particular, this should cover a virtuous circle of ‘theory and practice’ (Tranfield & Starkey, 1998) through which research on practice informs practically derived theory. This in turn becomes a blueprint for decision making practice, thereby increasing stock of relevant and practical knowledge.  Thus, any decision-making research needs to engage simultaneously with both ‘world of theory’ and ‘world of practice’. Consequently, decision problems addressed should grow out of interaction between these two worlds rather than either on their own.  2. RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES 5  ‘Philosophy’ is an over-arching term that relates to the ‘development and nature of knowledge’, which, at first reading, sounds rather profound. But the point is that this is precisely what researchers do when embarking on research … ‘developing base of knowledge in any relevant field of enquiry’.  The knowledge development that researchers are embarking upon may not be as dramatic as the new theory of human motivation. The purpose here should be to answer any problem specified in the developing knowledge domain.  Any researchers need to be aware of philosophical commitments made through the choice of research strategy as this has a significant impact not only on what researchers do but also on what they are going to investigate (Johnson and Clark, 2006).  This can be highlighted in line with researchers Johnson and Clark (2006), who argue that the important issue is not whether any research should be philosophically-informed. Still, it is how well researchers can reflect upon philosophical choices and defend alternatives that could be adopted.  2.1 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES: PRAGMATISM 6  As a conceptual basis under research philosophy, Pragmatism accepts any concepts to be relevant only if they support action.  As Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill (2012) described, Pragmatics ‘recognize that there are many different ways of interpreting the world and undertaking research, that no single point of view can ever give the entire picture and that there may be multiple realities’.  Positivism and Interpretivism are the two extreme mutually exclusive paradigms of concern. Pragmatism is an essential determinant of epistemology (the theory of knowledge, especially with regard to its methods, validity, and scope, and the distinction between justified belief and opinion), ontology (the branch of metaphysics dealing with the nature of being) and axiology ( the philosophical study of value.  It includes questions about the nature and classification of values and about what kinds of things have value) any researcher may adopt should the question of research - anyone may be more appropriate than the other for answering (Tashakkori & Teddlie 1998).  2.1 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES: PRAGMATISM 7  If any research does not confer unambiguously that a positivism or interpretivism philosophy is to be adopted, this confirms the pragmatist’s basic view.  Tashakkori & Teddlie (1998) work on pragmatism and contend it was intuitively appealing. In line with their view, any researcher should ‘study what interests and is of value, a study in different ways in which it deems appropriate, and finally use results in ways that signify about positive consequences within value system’.  Pragmatics (the study of how context contributes to meaning) thus, combines positivism and Interpretivism within the scope of a single research study according to the nature of the research question.  Studies with pragmatism research philosophy may integrate multiple research methods, as depicted in next.  2.2 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES: POSITIVISM 8  Positivism refers to a philosophical approach that aims to legitimize the scientific study of human organization within the social sciences. It advocates for the discovery and assessment of general laws through theoretical and empirical work. While not universally accepted, positivistic elements can be found within various specialties of social science.  As a philosophical view, positivism refers to the view that only ‘factual’ knowledge gained through observation is trustworthy.  Positivism depends on quantifiable observations that lead to statistical analyses.  As per the view of the researchers Crowther & Lancaster (2008), it has been noted that ‘as a philosophy, positivism follows the empiricist view that knowledge stems from human experience’.  It has an atomistic, ontological view of the world as comprising discrete, observable elements and events that interact in a discernible, determined and regular manner.  2.2 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES: POSITIVISM 9  Any research that reflects the philosophy of positivism will probably adopt the philosophical stance of natural scientists.  Researchers will then prefer ‘working with observable social reality and that the end product of such research can be law-like generalizations similar to those produced by the physical and natural scientists’ (Remenyi et al., 1998).  Like the ‘resources’ researcher earlier, phenomena that can be observed here will produce credible data.  To generate a research strategy to collect data, the researcher has to use existing theory to  2.3 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES: INTERPRETIVISM 10  The definition of interpretivism is a sociological method of research in which an action or event is analyzed based on the beliefs, norms, and values of the culture of the society in which it takes place. It is a qualitative method used to analyze data related to human actions in sociology.  Interpretivism is associated with the philosophical position of idealism and is used to group diverse approaches, including social constructivism, phenomenology and hermeneutics, approaches that reject the objectivist view that meaning resides within the world independently of consciousness (Collins, 2010).  The development of this philosophy is based on the critique of positivism in social sciences, and accordingly, this philosophy emphasizes qualitative analysis over quantitative analysis.  RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES: INTERPRETIVISM 11  Interpretivism allows any researcher to understand differences between humans in the researcher’s role as social actors.  The heritage of this strand of interpretivism is generated from two intellectual traditions: phenomenology and symbolic interactionism.  First, it refers to how researchers make sense of the world around them. Interactionism is a theoretical perspective that derives social processes from human interaction.  In symbolic interactionism, there is a continual process of interpreting the social world. Axiology is another branch of philosophy that studies judgments about value.  Although this may include values the researcher possesses in aesthetics and ethics, it is the process of social enquiry that the researcher enquired.  2.4 PHILOSOPHIES VS. STRATEGIES 12 Philosoph Resear Ontology Axiology Research ies / ch Strategy Strategy approa ch Positivism Deductiv Objective Value Free Quantitative e Interpretivis Inductiv Subjective Biased Qualitative m e Pragmatism Deductiv Objective Value Free / Qualitative and / e/ or Biased or Quantitative Inductiv Subjective e  3.1RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES: REALISM 13  Realism is any philosophical concept that relates to scientific enquiry. It relies on the idea of independence of reality extracted from the human mind. This philosophy is based on the assumption of a scientific approach to knowledge development.  Realism can be divided into two groups: direct and critical. The first can be described as ‘what you see is what you get’, while the second argues that ‘humans experience the sensations and images of the real world’. According to critical realism, sensations and images of the natural world can be deceptive and usually do not portray the real world (Novikov & Novikov, 2013).  Realism adheres to a branch of epistemology similar to positivism in that it assumes a scientific approach to knowledge development. This assumption underpins the collection and understanding of the data. The essence of realism is that what the senses show as reality is the truth: ‘that objects have an existence independent of the human mind’. Realism is opposed to idealism, the theory that only the ‘mind and its contents exist’.  3.2 RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES: ONTOLOGY 14  Ontology is the ‘study of existence’ at its most straightforward meaning. Philosophically, it confers to ‘concerned with nature of reality’ with assumptions about how the world operates and the commitment held to specific views.  Objectivism and subjectivism are two aspects of ontology used in research parlance. Objectivism portrays that social entities exist in reality, external to social actors concerned with existence. Subjectivism is the concept conferring those social phenomena created from perceptions and consequent actions of those social actors concerned with their existence.  Subjectivism is a social phenomenon that is created from perceptions and sequential actions. Remenyi et al. (1998) observe the necessity of studying this as ‘details of the situation to understand the reality or perhaps a reality working behind them’.  Another term for research philosophy is Epistemology, which concerns what constitutes acceptable knowledge in a field of study.  3.3 RESEARCH PARADIGMS 15  Paradigm is a term primarily used in social sciences, which can lead to confusion as it is diversified and has multiple meanings. In the parlance of empirical research, the paradigm examines social phenomena from which particular understandings of these phenomena can be gained and explanations attempted.  Four paradigms are arranged to correspond to four conceptual dimensions: Radical change, Regulation, Subjectivist and Objectivist.  Radical change in social science and behaviour relates to a judgment about the way towards organizational changes. The dimension of radical change adopts a critical perspective on life, and the regulatory perspective is considered less judgmental.  The Regulation seeks to explain how issues are circulated and offer suggestions for how they may be improved within how problems are executed.  Subjectivist doctrine confers: ‘our mental activity is the only unquestionable fact of our experience’.  Objectivist philosophy derives its explanations of action and causation from the ‘axiom of identity’, calling causation ‘the law of identity applied to action’.  RESEARCH PARADIGMS 16  Burrell & Morgan (1982) reconcile and describe the purposes of four paradigms as: - ‘to help researchers clarify their assumptions about their view of the nature of science and society; - to offer a useful way of understanding how other researchers approach their work; - to help researchers plot their route through their research; and finally - to understand where it is possible to go and where they are going’.  A functionalist paradigm is in the bottom right corner of the quadrant. This is located in the objectivist and regulatory dimensions and is the paradigm within which most research operates. It is often problem- oriented and concerned with solving practical problems (Burrell & Morgan, 1982). Contained in the bottom left corner of the quadrant is an interpretive paradigm. As noted, the philosophical position to which this refers is how humans attempt to make sense of the world around them.  RESEARCH PARADIGMS 17  The radical humanist paradigm is located within the subjectivist and radical change dimensions in the top left corner. As stated earlier, the radical change dimension adopts a critical perspective on organizational life. As such, working within this paradigm, one would be concerned with changing the status quo (Burrell and Morgan, 1979).  Last, in the top right corner of the quadrant, is the radical structuralist paradigm. Here, research witnessed the intention to achieve fundamental change by analyzing organizational phenomena such as power relationships and patterns of conflict. The radical structuralism paradigm adheres to structural patterns within work organizations, namely hierarchies and reporting relationships, and the extent to which these may produce dysfunctionalities.  Comparison of four types of research philosophies are depicted in the next two table (Saunders, 2003).  3.4 COMPARISON OF FOUR RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES 18 Research Positivism Realism Interpretivism Pragmatism Philosophies / Characteristics 1. Ontology: -External, -Objective. -Socially - External. Researcher’s view objective and -Independent of constructed. - Multiple view regarding nature independent human thoughts. -Subjective. -Chosen to best of reality or being of social -Interpreted as -May change and enable answering actors. social conditioning. multiple. of research question. 2. - Only -Observable -Subjective - Either or both Epistemology: observable phenomena meanings and Observable Researcher’s view phenomena -Provide credible social phenomena. regarding what can provide facts and data. phenomena. -Subjective constitutes credible data, -Focus on -Focus upon meanings acceptable facts. explaining within a details of - Focus on knowledge -Focus on context or contexts situation. practical applied causality and -Motivating research. law. actions. -Integrating different perspectives.  3.4 COMPARISON OF FOUR RESEARCH PHILOSOPHIES 19 Research Positivism Realism Interpretivism Pragmatism Philosophies / Characteristic s 3. Axiology: - Research is - Research is - Research is - Values play a Researcher’s undertaken in a value laden; value bound, large role in view regarding cannot be interpreting value-free way. researcher is role of values in separated and results, the research -Researcher is biased by world will be researcher independent of views, cultural subjective adopting both data experiences objective and maintaining and subjective Objective. upbringing. points of view. - All these will impact on the research. 4. Data -Highly - Methods -Small samples, - Mixed or collection structured, chosen must fit in-depth multiple Techniques: -Large samples. the subject investigations method Researchers Measurement. matter. -Qualitative designs. view regarding -Quantitative as - Quantitative - Quantitative collecting well as or qualitative. and qualitative  4. CONCLUSION 20  A research philosophy is a set of basic beliefs that guide the design and execution of a research study, and different research philosophies offer different ways of understanding scientific research.  In conclusion, it may be highlighted that, qualitative research is often deal with Interpretivism, but alternatives do exist.  Besides critical research and positivism, qualitative research in arena of information systems may be well performed by following a paradigm of pragmatism which is associated with action, intervention and constructive knowledge.  Many researchers use interpretivism and pragmatism concepts that are considered and thought as two possible and important research paradigms for mixed research in hypothesizing information based problem on behavioral modeling.  5. TIME HORIZONS 21  Time horizons must emphasize research design, independent of which research strategy the researcher will pursue by choice of method. Cross-Sectional Studies  The main feature of a cross-sectional study is that it can compare different population groups at a single point in time.  The research will probably be cross-sectional, studying a particular phenomenon at a specific time. Cross-sectional studies often employ the survey strategy (Easterby-Smith et al., 2008; Robson, 2002).  They may seek to describe the incidence of a phenomenon or explain how factors are related in different organizations.  However, they may also use qualitative methods. Many case studies are based on interviews conducted over a short period.  5. TIME HORIZONS 22 Longitudinal Studies  A longitudinal study is a method of observational research in which data is gathered for the same subjects repeatedly over time. The main strength of longitudinal research is its capacity to study change and development.  Adams & Schvaneveldt (1991) point out that in observing people or events over time, the researcher can exercise control over variables being studied, provided that they are not affected by the research process. Conclusion  Both Cross-sectional and Longitudinal studies are observational studies. Researchers record information about their subjects without manipulating the study environment. The benefit of a cross-sectional study design is that it allows researchers to compare many different variables at the same time. However, cross-sectional studies may not provide definite information about ‘cause-and-effect relationships’. On the other hand, the benefit of a longitudinal study is that researchers can detect developments or  6. CREDIBILITY OF RESEARCH FINDINGS 23  Creditability of research output reduces the possibility of getting the answer wrong, which means that attention has to be paid to two particular emphases on research design: Reliability and Validity.  Reliability refers to the extent to which data collection techniques or analysis procedures will yield consistent findings.  Reliability can be assessed by posing the following three questions (Easterby-Smith et al., 2008): -Will the measures yield the same results on other occasions? -Will other observers reach similar observations? - Is there any transparency made from the raw data?  6. CREDIBILITY OF RESEARCH FINDINGS 24  Robson (2002) asserts that there may be four threats to reliability.  The first of these is a subject error.  Similarly, there may be subject bias. This is a particular problem in any firm characterized by an authoritarian management style or when employment insecurity is threatened. Researchers should avoid this problem when designing questionnaires.  Third, there may have been observer error.  Finally, there may have been observer bias. The researcher should handle all the threats strategically.  6. CREDIBILITY OF RESEARCH FINDINGS 25 Validity  Validity concerns whether the findings are about what they appear to be about. It indicates how sound the research is. More specifically, Validity applies to both the design and the research methods.  Internal Validity is affected by flaws within the study, such as not controlling some of the significant variables or problems with the research instrument. Factors that affect internal Validity are subject variability, size of the subject population, time given for the data collection or experimental treatment, attrition, maturation, etc.  External Validity is the extent to which a researcher can generalize findings to a larger group. If research lacks external Validity, findings cannot be applied to contexts other than the one in which the researcher carried out research. Important factors that affect external Validity are Population characteristics, Interaction of subject selection and research, Descriptive explicitness of the independent variable, Effect of research environment, Data collection methodology, Effect of time, etc.  7. DATA COLLECTION 26  The choice of sampling techniques depends on the feasibility and sensibility of collecting data to answer the research question(s) and address the objectives set by the population.  Based on the Research question(s) and objectives, researcher will need to consider whether the researcher needs to use sampling. Occasionally, it may be possible to collect and analyze data covering all information as named by complete enumeration. However, for most of the research questions and objectives, it will be impossible for the researcher to either collect or analyze all available data due to restrictions on time, money, human resources, and often access.  Sampling techniques provide a range of methods that enable any researcher to reduce the required data by considering only data from a sub-group rather than all possible cases or elements. In sampling, the term ‘population’ is not used commonly, as the complete set of cases need not necessarily be people.  For some research questions, it is possible to collect data from an entire population as it is manageable. However, researchers should not assume that a census would provide more useful results than collecting data from a sample representing the entire population.  7. DATA COLLECTION 27  Sampling provides a valid alternative to a census when it would be impracticable for the researcher to survey the entire population.  Researchers opt for sampling for all research questions where it would be impracticable for the researcher to collect data from the whole population.  Whether researchers plan to use interviews, questionnaires, observation, or some other data collection technique will be equally important. Researchers like Henry (1990) argue that sampling makes a higher overall accuracy possible than a census.  Sampling is of two types: probability and non-probability sampling. Most of the time, researchers prefer to use a randomized sampling scheme under probability sampling.  Stratified random sampling is a modification of random sampling in which the researcher divides the population into two or more relevant and significant strata based on one or several attributes.  8. COLLECTING PRIMARY DATA THROUGH QUESTIONNAIRES 28  Within business management research, the most significant use of questionnaires is within the survey strategy. However, both experiment and case study research strategies can use these techniques. The use of questionnaires is discussed in many research methods texts. These range from those that devote a few pages to it to those that specify precisely how researchers should construct and use them, such as Dillman’s (2007) tailored design method. Perhaps not surprisingly, the questionnaire is one of the survey strategy's most widely used data collection techniques.  Because each person (respondent) is asked to respond to the same set of questions, it efficiently collects responses from a large sample before quantitative analysis. The questionnaire design will affect both the response rate and reliability and validity of the collected data. Response rates, validity and reliability, can be maximized by careful design of individual questions, straightforward and pleasing questionnaire layout, lucid explanation of the purpose of the questionnaire, pilot testing, and carefully planned and executed administration.  8. COLLECTING PRIMARY DATA THROUGH QUESTIONNAIRES 29  Questionnaires are usually not particularly good for empirical research that requires large numbers of open- ended questions. They work best with standardized questions that the researcher can be confident will be interpreted the same way by all respondents (Robson, 2002).  Explanatory or analytical research gives more credence to examining and explaining relationships between variables, particularly cause-and-effect relationships. Explanatory research requires data to test a theory or theories. In addition to issues raised for descriptive research, there is a need to define the theories the researcher wants to test as relationships between variables before designing a questionnaire. Therefore, a literature review should be done extensively to discuss ideas widely and conceptualized (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2005).