Research Philosophy: Importance and Types

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

The Importance of Research Philosophy
The Research Paradigm of Epistemology
The Research Paradigm of Ontology
The Interplay Between Epistemology and Ontology
Epistemological Interpretivism in Qualitative Research
Reference List

The Importance of Research Philosophy

Research philosophy occupies a significant place in the field of science and education. In general, philosophy deals with the “study of knowledge, reality and existence” (Moon et al., 2018, p. 296). When concerning the realm of research, the philosophical approach determines the very direction of a scholar’s thought, thus attributing his or her findings to a particular branch of science. In other words, a type of research one chooses when using specific philosophical thinking predetermines the overall theoretical framework, results and contributions of a study (Moon et al., 2018).

According to Dougherty and Slevc (2019), the identification of one’s research philosophy when participating in scientific research is vital because it clearly articulates the goals and estimated outcomes of a study, as well as the perspectives for its evaluation. The choice of a philosophical approach, such as objectivism, constructivism or others, defines a set of specific categories, sources of data or dissemination goals (Dougherty and Slevc, 2019). Therefore, the application of research philosophy is critical in scientific activity since it provides a concise theoretical platform for a study.

The Research Paradigm of Epistemology

Epistemology is a branch of research philosophy that is aimed at studying the essence of knowledge and scientific facts. As Kivunja and Kuyini (2017) state, this branch enables describing how the knowledge appeared, what forms it has, and how it impacts the world. Epistemology helps to interpret the investigated question in the appropriate context by establishing logical explanations. When choosing this research paradigm, a scholar might retrieve knowledge from such sources as intuitive, authoritative, logical and empirical knowledge (Kivunja and Kuyini, 2017). The character of a study will differ depending on the source.

Therefore, there exist such branches of epistemology as interpretivism and positivism that apply to social sciences. Interpretivism is broadly used in qualitative studies and is based on the idea that any scientific finding should be interpreted within a social context and cannot be quantitatively measured (Gichuru, 2017). Interpretivists argue that their research problems are inherent in human nature and should be investigated accordingly.

On the other hand, positivism is a paradigm that employs the similarities between the natural and social domains to explain the investigated knowledge (Gichuru, 2017). More specifically, it applies the methods used in natural sciences to research the issues of the social domain (Eketu, 2017). Positivism interprets given knowledge only from a scientific perspective relying on empirical data.

The Research Paradigm of Ontology

Ontology is a philosophical research paradigm that investigates the nature of being. The reality is viewed from the perspective of an individual, and the knowledge is researched via the lens of “physical and ecological systems” of the world that is inhabited by individuals who have their values (McManus et al., 2017, p. 4). Ontology concentrates on the “categories of things that exist and their relations” as perceived by a researcher (Kivunja and Kuyini, 2017, p. 27). According to this paradigm, a scholar makes particular assumptions about the specific issues under investigation.

There exist several ontological approaches, including objectivism and constructivism. Objectivism deals with the researched phenomena from the point of view that a researcher is external to the investigated problem and might evaluate it objectively (McManus et al., 2017; Ragab and Arisha, 2018). Objectivists think that all researched phenomena might be viewed as empirical units and might be easily measured. Therefore, this methodology is vastly used in quantitative studies. At the same time, constructivism is defined by a set of different assumptions based on people’s experiences and interactions with the world (Moon et al., 2018).

From this perspective, the research phenomena are viewed as social constructions (Hay, 2016; Pernecky, 2016). By perceiving reality through the perspective of the human mind, constructivism aims at understanding the essence of being and is usually applied to qualitative studies.

The Interplay Between Epistemology and Ontology

Due to the fact that both epistemology and ontology are the branches of research philosophy, they are linked and share some similar features. For example, objectivism and positivism are connected by the idea that the phenomena under study are measurable and might be evaluated objectively because the researcher is external to the researched problem (Ryan, 2018, Zukauskas, Vveinhardt and Andriukaitiene, 2018).

Also, constructivism and interpretivism are linked because they both investigate a problem or phenomena within a particular context taking into account multiple influential factors of it (Harrison et al., 2017). Thus, there are significant similarities in the ontological and epistemological approaches that might be useful when choosing a research philosophy.

Epistemological Interpretivism in Qualitative Research

The most optimal paradigm of research philosophy for a qualitative study in social sciences is epistemological interpretivism. Firstly, the epistemological realm allows for analysing data by logically investigating the essence of knowledge and its forms, which might amplify the credibility of the research findings. Secondly, the interpretivist worldview provides an opportunity to put the phenomena into the social context and investigate them according to their relation to human nature. Therefore, epistemological interpretivism will ensure the best qualitative outcomes of the research.

Reference List

Dougherty, M. R., Slevc, L. R. and Grand, J. A. (2019) ‘Making research evaluation more transparent: aligning research philosophy, institutional values, and reporting’, Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(3), pp. 1-21.

Eketu, C. A. (2017) ‘Management research: a thought on validity of positivism’, International Journal of Advanced Academic Research, 3(11), pp. 133-139.

Gichuru, M. J. (2017) ‘The interpretive research paradigm: a critical review of is research methodologies’, International Journal of Innovative Research and Advanced Studies, 4(2), pp. 1-5. Webb.

Harrison, H. et al. (2017) ‘Case study research: foundations and methodological orientations’, Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 18(1). Web.

Hay, C. (2016) ‘Good in a crisis: the ontological institutionalism of social constructivism’, New Political Economy, 21(6), pp. 520-535.

Kivunja, C. and Kuyini, A. B. (2017) ‘Understanding and applying research paradigms in educational contexts’, International Journal of Higher Education, 6(5), pp. 26-41.

McManus, P. et al. (2017) ‘An investigation in the methodological approaches used in doctoral business research in Ireland’, ECRM 2017: 16th European Conference on Research Methodology for Business and Management Studies, Dublin, pp. 1-11.

Moon, K. et al. (2018) ‘Expanding the role of social science in conservation through an engagement with philosophy, methodology, and methods’, Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 10(3), pp. 294-302.

Pernecky, T. (2016) Epistemology and metaphysics for qualitative research. London: Sage.

Ragab, M. A. and Arisha, A. (2018) ‘Research methodology in business: a starter’s guide’, Management and Organisational Studies, 5(1), pp. 1-23.

Ryan, G. (2018) ‘Introduction to positivism, interpretivism and critical theory’, Nurse Researcher, 25(4), pp. 41-49.

Zukauskas, P., Vveinhardt, J. and Andriukaitiene, R. (2018) Management culture and corporate social responsibility. London: IntechOpen.

Click Here To Order Now!