research paradigm in qualitative research pdf

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Download Free PDF

Research Paradigms: Theory and Practice

2015, Research on Humanities and Social Sciences

This paper reflects on the ontological, epistemological and methodological underpinnings of the two major research approaches i.e the quantitative and the qualitative approaches. Their differences, occasioned by these philosophical foundations are discussed and practical implications examined. It is our view that this paper will have positive impact on the work of researchers and students undertaking courses in research studies.

Related papers

Tshidi M Wyllie, 2019

To accumulate a body of knowledge which can inform and improve socio-economic and political human existence requires evidence-based approaches, as such, conducting scientific researches is usually carried out to find solutions to a prevailing phenomenon; therefore, extracting and accumulating such a scientific knowledge and/or information is a crucial process. In this endeavour, researchers usually deploy various scientific approaches and methods; methods which are mostly informed by ontological and epistemological underpinnings. In discussing quantitative and qualitative research approaches and drawing distinction between the two approaches this paper will explain the three major dimensions considered critical in research process

Introduction Educational researchers in every discipline need to be cognisant of alternative research traditions to make decisions about which method to use when embarking on a research study. There are two major approaches to research that can be used in the study of the social and the individual world. These are quantitative and qualitative research. Although there are books on research methods that discuss the differences between alternative approaches, it is rare to find an article that examines the design issues at the intersection of the quantitative and qualitative divide based on eminent research literature. The purpose of this article is to explain the major differences between the two research paradigms by comparing them in terms of their epistemological, theoretical, and methodological underpinnings. Since quantitative research has well-established strategies and methods but qualitative research is still growing and becoming more differentiated in methodological approaches, greater consideration will be given to the latter.

The philosophical underpinning of pragmatism allows and guides qualitative/quantitative researchers to use a variety of approaches to answer research questions. Pragmatism's philosophical underpinning permits and directs researchers to use a range of methodologies to address research questions. However, this article provides the philosophical and conceptual framework that informed the two research methodologies and discusses how ontological and epistemological issues were translated in to specific methodological strategies and influence researchers methodological decision. The purpose in writing this article is to describe and reflect on the differences between the two research methodologies from ontological, epistemological and methodological perspectives and how they will be selected for research.

Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung Forum Qualitative Social Research, 2001

All research is based on some underlying philosophical assumptions about what constitutes 'valid' research and which research method(s) is/are appropriate for the development of knowledge in a given study. In order to conduct and evaluate any research, it is therefore important to know what these assumptions are. This chapter discusses the philosophical assumptions and also the design strategies underpinning this research study. Common philosophical assumptions were reviewed and presented; the interpretive paradigm was identified for the framework of the study. In addition, the chapter discusses the research methodologies, and design used in the study including strategies, instruments, and data collection and analysis methods, while explaining the stages and processes involved in the study.

UNICAF University - Zambia, 2021

The Cyprus Journal of Sciences, 2013

Carrying out a research paper is concerned to be a simple task. However, in practice it is far more complicated. The most important factor is for the researcher to know the main principles of the research process. It is vital to identify the research methods progression, the meaning and purpose of the research to be carried out, by the formulation of hypothesis, aims and questions, the use of methodology-both quantitative and qualitative-their characteristics and suitability when utilized, and the need of sampling and ethical considerations. By the use of theoretical framework, the current research paper firstly discusses and analyses the principles of bringing about a research paper, and most importantly it emphasizes the advantages and disadvantages of research methodology.

The purpose of this study is compared strengths and weaknesses of qualitative and quantitative research methodologies in social science fields. Reviewed recent secondary resources, there is no best approach between both research methodologies due to existing strengths and weaknesses among both types of research methodologies. To plan and implement a research, choosing either one research methodology will still be occurred strengths and weaknesses for the research. This common study only based on existing secondary data and sources to interpret results. No primary data approach on this study due to sufficient source and data from secondary resources. The defined cases have proven that complementary approach between qualitative and quantitative approaches for a same research topic may provide expected results as both references better than just thoroughly considering either one research methodology approach.

M.Lib.I.Sc. Project, Panjab University, under guidance of Dr. Shiv Kumar, 2019

There's no hard and fast rule for qualitative versus quantitative research, and it's often taken for granted. It is claimed here that the divide between qualitative and quantitative research is ambiguous, incoherent, and hence of little value, and that its widespread use could have negative implications. This conclusion is supported by a variety of arguments. Qualitative researchers, for example, have varying perspectives on fundamental problems (such as the use of quantification and causal analysis), which makes the difference as such shaky. In addition, many elements of qualitative and quantitative research overlap significantly, making it difficult to distinguish between the two. Practically in the case of field research, the Qualitative and quantitative approach can't be distinguished clearly as the study pointed. The distinction may limit innovation in the development of new research methodologies, as well as cause complication and wasteful activity. As a general rule, it may be desirable not to conceptualise research approaches at such abstract levels as are done in the context of qualitative or quantitative methodologies. Discussions of the benefits and drawbacks of various research methods, rather than general research questions, are recommended.

Archeologia Classica - Supplementi e Monografie, 2021

Romanian Journal of Medical Practice, 2020

ISSN 0921-8181

Historia crítica, 2021

Resurgance of Ornamentation, 2021

Heterotopías, 2023

Bulletin of the …, 2010

International Journal of Environment and Waste Management, 2019

Dignity of the Calling: Educators Share the Beginnings of Their Journeys, 2018

Tabucchi postumo. Da «Per Isabel» all’Archivio Tabucchi della Bibliothèque Nationale de France, a cura di Thea Rimini, Bruxelles, Peter Lang, 2017, pp. 69-84, 2017

Journal of Sea Research, 2007

Journal of Evidence Based Medicine and Healthcare, 2016

Software and Systems Modeling, 2021

Health Economics, 1992

European Journal of Pediatrics

Development Policy Review, 2015

Journal of Public Health, 2017

Revista Medica Herediana, 2013

Molecular vision, 2005

Chemical Engineering Transactions, 2020

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Paradigms in Qualitative Research

• First Online: 01 December 2017

Cite this chapter

• Bartosz Sławecki 4  

4259 Accesses

6 Citations

The aim of the chapter is to raise novice researchers’ awareness of the significance of philosophical assumptions for their practical activity. The text presents the basic terms connected with the methodology of social sciences. The entire discussion is centered on the issue of paradigms. Various approaches within the framework of basic philosophical assumptions are discussed—concerning the nature of social reality (ontologies), the nature of scientific cognition (epistemologies), and practical ways of conducting social research (methodologies). An important element of the text is the presentation of two classifications of paradigms in social sciences with particular consideration given to qualitative research.

This work was supported by the Polish National Science Center grant 2013/11/D/HS4/03878

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Foundations, Mishaps and Dissemination of Qualitative Approaches

Beyond qualitative/quantitative structuralism: the positivist qualitative research and the paradigmatic disclaimer.

Paradigms in Qualitative IB Research: Trends, Analysis and Recommendations

Benton, T., & Craib, I. (2010). Philosophy of Social Science: The Philosophical Foundations of Social Thought (2nd ed.). Houndsmill/Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave.

Google Scholar  

Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1985). Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis: Elements of the Sociology of Corporate Life . Farnham: Routledge.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2005). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Giddens, A. (1993). New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretative Sociologies . Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Paradigmatic Controversies, Contradictions, and Emerging Confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed., pp. 191–215). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Heller, M. (2011). Philosophy in Science . Berlin: Springer.

Book   Google Scholar  

Heron, J. (1996). Co-Operative Inquiry: Research into the Human Condition . London: Sage.

Hetmański, M. (2008). Epistemology—Old Dilemmas and New Perspectives. Dialogue and Universalism, 18 (7/8), 11–28.

Article   Google Scholar  

Kostera, M. (1996). Postmodernizm w zarządzaniu [Postmodernism in Management]. Warsaw: PWE.

Kostera, M. (2007). Organisational Ethnography: Methods and Inspirations . Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd ed., enl). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

McCloskey, D. (1983). The Rhetoric of Economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 21 (2), 481–517.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook . Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Morgan, G. (1980). Paradigms, Metaphors, and Puzzle Solving in Organization Theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25 (4), 605–622.

Morgan, G. (1981). The Schismatic Metaphor and Its Implications for Organizational Analysis. Organization Studies, 2 (1), 23–44.

Morgan, G. (1983). More on Metaphor: Why We Cannot Control Tropes in Administrative Science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28 (4), 601–607.

Morgan, G. (2006). Images of Organization (Updated ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Schutz, A. (1972). Collected Papers I . M. Natanson (Ed.) (T. 11). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

Silverman, D. (2005). Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook . London: Sage.

Sintonen, M., Wolenski, J., & Niiniluoto, I. (2004). Handbook of Epistemology . Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Woleński, J. (2004). The History of Epistemology. In I. Niiniluoto, M. Sintonen, & J. Woleński (Eds.), Handbook of Epistemology (pp. 3–54). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Poznań University of Economics and Business, Poznań, Poland

Bartosz Sławecki

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Teesside University Business School, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, United Kingdom

Malgorzata Ciesielska

Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego, Warszawa, Poland

Dariusz Jemielniak

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Sławecki, B. (2018). Paradigms in Qualitative Research. In: Ciesielska, M., Jemielniak, D. (eds) Qualitative Methodologies in Organization Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65217-7_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65217-7_2

Published : 01 December 2017

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-65216-0

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-65217-7

eBook Packages : Business and Management Business and Management (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research