'Positivism' and 'Social Constructionism' are two contrasting
traditions of social science research.
By: Vera Ndrecaj, BA(Hons), MBA
verandrecaj@yahoo.co.uk
verandrecaj@yahoo.co.uk
The research philosophies
contain important assumptions about the way the ‘world’ will be
viewed (Saunders
et al., 2008). Most of the topics belong to social science
because they contain human aspects (Smith and Dainty, 1991; Saunders et al.,
2009). In this context, Biggs (1986) explained that, social science research is a technique of talking to people about their experience, attitudes, opinions,
complains, feeling, emotions and believes.
Burrell and Morgan (1979) model will help us to distinguish between the nature of science and
society research, to understand various research approaches, and also to clarify the research direction (Saunders et al.,
2009). The research contain elements of inside-inquiry research that is characterized as an
anti-positivistic, phenomenological, enthnomethodological, experiential,
existential, ideographic, participative, anthropological, qualitative,
dialectic, pragmatic, subjective, intensive, soft, and unscientific (Smith and
Dainty, 1991). Each of these characteristics represents a ‘high context’ nation
(Hall, 1976). The research will investigate the relationship between two variables ‘high staff turnover’ and structure of the organization by identifying factors causing the phenomenon since is a little known about the nature of these variables. Building and establishing body of knowledge can possibly be associated with ‘science’ (Bennett, 1983; Smith and Dainty, 1991).
Despite the fact that
there is an ongoing debate how social research could be conducted, ‘positivism’
and ‘social constructivism’ are seen as a red and blue corners two contrasting
epistemological philosophises of social science (Holton
1993; Guba and Lincoln, 1994; Feigl, 1969; and Easterby-Smith et al., 2008), their principals and characteristics separate epistemological
assumptions, but share the ontological or real word assumption (Knorr-Cetina,
1983; Guba and Lincoln, 1989; Becker and Niehaves, 2006). Confusion can occur
at the time that the social science is often interchangeable with the natural
science, or if is not distinguished between epistemology described by (Crotty,
1998) as a set of assumptions as regards the best way of inquire into the
nature of the world, and ontology described by (ibid) as a philosophical
assumptions about the nature of reality. However, Remenyi et al., (1998) cited
by Saunders et al., (2009) argued that, the philosophical position of the
natural science will be suitable if the research philosophy reflect the
principals of positivism. While, Weber (2004) clarified that, they have
something in common, both share the assumption that, ‘real world’ exist beyond
the realms of human cognition. Although, Kuhn (1962; 1970) claims that,
research is validated not only by objective scientific evidence, but also by
the consensus of community orientated practitioners. This is a description
which has appealed to sociologists because it appears to question their
believes that natural science hold higher authority than social science
(Bryant, 1975; Heyl, 1975; and Barnes, 1983) cited by Hassard (1991). Social
science studies the human aspects of the world, therefore is important to
understand (McQueen and Knussen, 2002).
The idea of ‘positivism’
initially dissented from Comte (1853) since several scientists came to
realise that there is a problem with epistemological approach in applying
physical science model (Dilthey, 1913; Pierce 1931; Husserl et al., 1970; and
Bernstein, 1971) it is developed in to a distinctive paradigm (Kuhn 1962 as cited
in Easterby-Smith et al., 2008). While the idea of social constructivism is
developed by Berger and Luckman (1966); Watzlawick (1984); and Shotter (1993),
people make sense of the ‘world’ by sharing their experience. But on the other hand, the key idea of
positivism is that the social world exists externally, knowledge is explicit,
and it is regarded as an objective ‘facts’ (Feigl, 1969; Holton 1993; Guba and
Lincoln, 1994; Nahapiet and Ghoshal 1998; Weber, 2004: Easterby-Smith, 2009). While, the idea of social
constructionism is that, people make sense of the ‘world’ through sharing their
experience with other via the medium of language, which mean that, negotiation
persuasion and power (Gergen (1991). It also creates tacit knowledge which is
regarded as a subjective (Berger and Luckman, 1966; Watzlawick, 1984; Shotter,
1993; Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998; and Estearby-Smith, 2009).
Alternatively, Crotty
(1998) states “... social constructionism
emphasises the hold our culture has on us: it shapes the way in which we see
things (even the way in which we feel things!) and gives us a quite definite
view of the world” (1998:58). This
mean that, the knowledge being
socially constricted is seemed as constructionism, it is a product of
linguistic, social and cultural practices Hall, (2008). Whereas, Gergen (1994)
argued that, through psychological views an individual’s knowledge of the world
is constructed within a social community.
The philosophical
assumption of positivism is “...use
existing theory to develop hypothesis” (Saunders et al., 2008:103) while
social constuctionism is associated with theory development such as ‘social
cognitive’ theory (Shunk, 2000), emphasise the importance of culture in context of better understanding
of situation and create knowledge based on this understanding (Derry, 1999; McMahon, 1997) and also
is associated with interpretive method (Habermas, 1970). On the other hand, positivism ... “observe
social reality” (Remenyi et al., 1998:35), the observer must be independent,
identify causal explanation, and use
deduction approach to find out what kind of observations will
demonstrate the truth (Collis and Hussey, 2003). In context, concepts need to
be operationalized enable facts to be measured quantitatively. Nevertheless,
Wood and Welch (2010) criticised the view by explaining this,”...the term quantitative and qualitative, should be avoided because their meaning
is confused. If we want to distinguish between a study involving a very large
sample, and a study involving a more detailed analysis of a smaller sample,
then we should say this and not use potentially misleading terms like
qualitative and quantitative (2010:68).
However, the modification
of positivist views began with Von Bertalanffy, (1962) explaining that, as a
result of development in natural science field and technology researches are
capable to examine full complexity of data and use mix method to analyse these
data. Positivist management research problems could be reduced in samples’
possible elements, reductionism, generalisation, and cross-sectional analysis
(Easerby-Smith, 2009). According to Burrell and Morgan, (1979) positivism takes
a problem orientated approach to have a better understanding of phenomena it is
concern with”...providing explanation of
the status quo, social order, consensus, social integration, solidarity, need
satisfaction, and actuality”
(1979:26). However, Patton, (2002) criticised that, a social world
differs from natural, physical world and it should be studied differently.
Alternatively, social
constructivism referred as an interpretive (Habermas, 1970), generate theory,
it is associated with inductive approach and its fundamental assumption are reality,
although, positivism test theories and is associated with deduction approach
(Kukla, 2000). This view is supported by Saunders et al (2009); (see table 4
appendix). Social constructivism gather rich data from which ideas are inducted
(Easterby-Smith et al., 2008), creates knowledge (Pratt and Floden, 1994; Gredler, 1997;
and Ernest, 1999), encourages learning (McMahon,
1997), and also ‘facts’ are measured qualitatively in small number of cases
chosen for specific reason, while for positivism approach (see table 2
appendix) select large numbers of sampling (Easterby-Smith et al., 2008). This epistemology of social science
rejects the positivism view that society could be studied objectively; it has
been developed as a critique of positivism to achieve an objective value-free social
science (Delanty, 1991; Hall, 2008).
Although, the view that positivism is the best research philosophy of
investigating human and social behavior is criticized by (Aiken, 1956) argued that,
it is just assumption of natural philosophise. The view is supported by
Saunders et al., (2009) explained that, working with observable social reality
the end product can be law-like generalisations similar to those in physical
and natural science.
There are many dimensions
along which the two broad types of research are said to differ. For example,
Easterby-Smith et al (2002: 30) list eight differences between positivism and
social constructionism, Robson (2002) lists eight assumptions of positivism and
eight “characteristic features” of “relativistic qualitative” approaches (2002:.25),
and Morgan and Smircich (1980) describe five dimensions of difference between
subjectivist and objectivist approaches. All three of these sources actually
point out that, the distinction is over-simplified or misleading, but each
explains the distinction in sufficiently clear terms to contribute to this
oversimplification (Wood and Welch, 2010). Regardless of the arguments put
forward, differences between two contrasting traditions is still not clear,
which philosophy approach is ‘better’ to be applied, despite the fact that both
are common approaches for management research (Weber, 2004). According to Saunders et al., (2008)
they are ‘better’ at doing different things (2008:116); it depends in research
question (ibid). However, Campbell and Staley, (1963); Cook and Campbell,
(1979); and Kerlinger (1973) have described good research as a careful
sampling, precise measurement, sophisticated design and analysis in the test of
hypothesis, these characteristics are similar with features of positivism (see
table 1). However, the cling of positivism, especially in management research
has possibly been partly encouraged by the status position of management
discipline. Smith and Dainty (1991) clarified that, any movement away from
positivistic methods does not mean that management research must therefore be
more biased, or unimportant, or that slavish loyalty to positivistic methods
ensure that these problem have overcome.
Strength of positivism
|
Strength of Social Constructivism
|
Testing and validities theories
Testing hypotheses before the data are collected
• Can generalize a research finding
when it has been replicated on many different populations and subpopulations
• Useful for obtaining data that
allow quantitative predictions to be made
• The researcher may construct a situation
that eliminates the confounding influence of many variables, allowing one to
more credibly assess cause-and-effect relationships
• Data collection using some
quantitative methods is relatively quick (e.g., telephone interviews)
• Provides precise, quantitative,
numerical data
• Data analysis is relatively less
time consuming (using statistical software)
• The research results are
relatively independent of the researcher
(e.g., affect size, statistical
significance).
• It may have higher credibility with
many people in power (e.g., administrators, politicians, people who fund
programs).
• It is useful for studying large
numbers of people
|
• The data are based on the
participants’ own categories of meaning
• It is useful for studying a
limited number of cases in depth
• It is useful for describing
complex phenomena
• Provides individual case
information
• Can conduct cross-case
comparisons and analysis
• Provides understanding and
description of people’s personal experiences of phenomena
• Can describe, in rich detail,
phenomena as they are situated and embedded in local contexts
• The researcher identifies
contextual and setting factors as they relate to the phenomenon of interest
• The researcher can study dynamic
processes (i.e., documenting sequential patterns and change)
• The researcher can use the
primarily qualitative method of “grounded theory” to generate inductively a
tentative but explanatory theory about a phenomenon
• Can determine how participants
interpret “constructs” (e.g., self-esteem
• Data are usually collected in
naturalistic settings in qualitative research
• Qualitative approaches are
responsive to local situations, conditions, and stakeholders’ needs
• Qualitative researchers are
responsive to changes that occur during the conduct of a study and may shift
the focus of their studies as a result
• Qualitative data in the words and
categories of participants lend themselves to exploring how and why phenomena
occur
• One can use an important case to
demonstrate vividly a phenomenon to the readers of a report
• Determine idiographic causation
(i.e., determination of causes of a particular event)
|
Weakness of positivism
|
Weakness of social
constructivism
|
• The researcher’s categories that
are used may not reflect local constituencies’ understandings
• The researcher’s theories that
are used may not reflect local constituencies’ understandings
• The researcher may miss out on
phenomena occurring because of the focus on theory or hypothesis testing rather
than on theory or hypothesis generation (called the confirmation
bias)
• Knowledge produced may be too
abstract and general for direct application to specific local situations,
contexts, and individuals
|
• Knowledge produced may not
generalize to other people or other settings (i.e., findings may be unique to
the relatively few people included in the research study)
• It is difficult to make
quantitative predictions.
• It is more difficult to test
hypotheses and theories
• It may have lower credibility
with some administrators and commissioners of programs
• It generally takes more time to
collect the data when compared no quantitative research
• Data analysis is often time
consuming
• The results are more easily
influenced by the researcher’s personal biases and idiosyncrasies
|
Table 1 Sources: Johnson and Onwuegbuzie
(2004); Easterby-Smith
et al (2008); and Saunders et al., (2008).
Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004);
Easterby-Smith et al (2008); and Saunders et al., (2008) have identified
strength and weakness of positivism and social constructivism as shown in table
1, which will help the author to chose which philosophical research approach
will answer the question (Saunders et al., 2008), but on the other hand, the
author has to take into consideration the nature of research topic (Creswell,
1994). In this context, quantitative and the positivist approach provide wide
exposure of whole situation, focus in hard data rather than opinion, it can be
fast and economical, but it required a complicated structure and become
inflexible (Easterby-Smith, 2008; Saunders et al, 2008). This approach is
criticised by Dalton, (1959) and Watson (1994) by pointing that, this approach
is rather idealistic, natural science do not follow its selves except in
laboratory. Although, social constructionist management approach could be good
for processes, and meanings, flexible and good for theory generation, data
collection is less artificial and employs qualitative approach
((Easterby-Smith, 2008). But on the other hand it could be time consuming,
analyses and interpretations are difficult, and also may not have credibility
with policy makers (ibid).
Burrell and Morgan (1979); Punch (1986); Bulmer (1988); and Fielding and
Fielding, (1986) support Easterby-Smith et al (2008) statement about two
contrasting traditions, emphasis that, mix methods provides more perspectives
in investigating phenomena. Another goal of using mix methodology is to boast
strengths and minimize weakness of both philosophies (Johnson and Onwuegbuzie
(2004). However, Howe (1988) argues that, qualitative and quantitative research
paradigms cannot and should not be mixed. The ‘high staff turnover’ study
represent the first attempt at developing a multiply paradigm analysis of the
organisation. The qualitative differences
between theory-community perspectives have been described by (Silverman, 1970;
Lincoln, 1985; and Martin 1989 cited by Smith and Dainty, 1991) and many have
cited a meta-theoretical debate as a root of such differences (Pondy and Boje,
1980; Morgan, 1986, and Wilmot 1989), than it can be argued that, (Burrell and
Morgan, 1979) model offered opportunities to learn languages and practice of
rival communities, and in turn to conduct characteristics of research of their
form of life, and also, through developing multiplies paradigm research we are able to realise greater epistemological variety in
organisational analysis (Smith and Dainty, 1991).
Therefore, to conclude,
there is an ongoing debate how social research could be conducted, ‘positivism’
and ‘social constructivism’ are seen as a red and blue corners two contrasting
epistemological philosophises of social science (Holton
1993; Guba and Lincoln, 1994; Feigl, 1969; and Easterby-Smith et al., 2008).
Their principals and characteristics separate epistemological assumptions, but
share the ontological or real word assumption (Knorr-Cetina, 1983; Guba and
Lincoln, 1989; Becker and Niehaves, 2006). Social science is often
interchangeable with the natural science, it is not distinguished between
epistemology (Crotty, 1998)
described it as a set of assumptions as regards the best way of inquire into
the nature of the world, and ontology described by (ibid) as a philosophical
assumptions about the nature of reality. However, the key idea of positivism is
that the social world exists externally, knowledge is explicit, and it is
regarded as an objective ‘facts’ (Feigl, 1969; Holton 1993; Guba and Lincoln,
1994; Nahapiet and Ghoshal 1998; Weber, 2004: Easterby-Smith, 2009). While, the idea of social constructionism
is that, people make sense of the ‘world’ through sharing their experience with
other via the medium of language, which mean that, negotiation persuasion and
power (Gergen (1991). It also creates tacit knowledge which is regarded as a
subjective (Berger and Luckman, 1966; Watzlawick, 1984; Shotter, 1993; Nahapiet
and Ghoshal, 1998; and Estearby-Smith, 2009).
Positivist approach, or
quantitative research provide wide exposure of whole situation, focus in hard
data rather than opinion, it can be fast and economical, but it required a complicated
structure and become inflexible (Easterby-Smith, 2008; Saunders et al, 2008).
This approach is criticised by Dalton, (1959) and Watson (1994) by pointing
that, this approach is rather idealistic, natural science do not follow its
selves except in laboratory. Although, social constructionist management
approach could be good for processes, and meanings, flexible and good for
theory generation, data collection is less artificial and employs qualitative
approach (Easterby-Smith, 2008). But on the other hand it could be time
consuming, analyses and interpretations are difficult, and also may not have
credibility with policy makers (ibid). The whole point of the study is that
which of contrasting traditions provide a better result, the perfection is fur from
both philosophise, they have their own strength and weakness. Therefore, mix
methodology could be a solution, in order to boast strengths and minimize
weakness of both philosophies.
Reference
(Anonymous) Social Constructivism. Available from: http://www.oup.com/uk/orc/bin/9780199285433/jackson_chap06.pdf
[Accessed, 30/01/2011]
Bryman. A and Bell. E (2007)
Business Research Methods. Oxford University Press Inc. New York. United
States.
Bryman. A (1984) The Debate about
Qualitative and Quantitative Research: The Question of Method or Epistemology.
Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/590553
[Accessed, 15/01/2011]
Biggs. L. C (1986) Learning how to
ask: A social linguistic appraisal of the role of the interview in social
science research. Cambridge University Press. United Kingdom.
Blaikie. N (1993) Approaches to
social enquiry. Cambridge University Press. United Kingdom.
Baldamus. N (1972) The role of
discoveries in social science. Tavistock. London.
Burrell. G and Morgan. G (1979)
Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analyses. Heinemann. London.
Comte. A (1853) The positive
philosophy of Auguste Comet.
Available from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=vSXXAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=subject:%22Positivism%22&hl=en&ei=WQtITbHIDcqAhAeU7aTnBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false
[Accessed,10/01/2011]
Collis. J and Hussey. R (2003)
Business Research. A Practical Guide for Undergraduate and Postgraduates
Students. 2nd ed. Palgrave MacMillan. Basingstoke.
Carr. A (2006) Family therapy:
concepts process and practice. Available from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=bnCq69bG1FYC&pg=PA110&dq=distinguish+between+positivism+and+social+constructionism&hl=en&ei=TQ1GTZVmppKEB73ogZ4L&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false
[Accessed, 10/01/2011]
Creswell. J (1994) Research Design;
Quantitative and Qualitative Approach. Sage. London.
Clark. M. A (2002) The
qualitative-quantitative debate: moving from positivism and confrontation to
post-positivism and reconciliation
Available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1998.00651.x/full
[Accessed/28/01/2011]
Crotty. M (1998) The Foundation of
Social Research: Meaning and Perspectives in Research Process. Stage.
London.
Easterby-Smith et al., (2008) Management Research. Sage. London.
Gill. J and Johnson. P (2002)
Research Methods for Managers. 3rd ed. Sage. London.
Gill.
J and Johnson. P (2010) Research Methods for Managers. SAGE Publication
Limited. London.
Glebbeek, A. C., and Bax, E. H. (2004) Is high
employee turnover really harmful? An empirical test using company records.
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 47. No. 2. Pp. 277-286.
Guba. E. G and Lincoln. Y. S (1989) Fourth
Generation Evaluation. Sage. London.
Hassard. L and Parker. M (1993)
Postmodernism and Organisations. Sage. London.
Hall. R (2008) Applied Social
Research: Planning, design and conducting real-world research. Palgrave
Macmillan. Australia.
Hibberd. J. H (2005) Unfolding
social constructionism. Available from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ccP1QSe5xMYC&pg=PR13&dq=positivism+and+social+constructionism+distinguishment&hl=en&ei=xgVGTYmqE4eAhAfXgJXoAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
[Accessed, 30/01/2011)
Hussey.
J and Hussey. R (1997) Business Research: A practical guide for undergraduate
and postgraduate students. Macmillan. Basingstoke.
Johnson. B. R and Onwuebuzie. J. A
(2004) Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Who’s Time Has Come.
Educational Researcher. Vol. 33. No. 7. Pp. 14-26.
Kuhn.
Th. S (1970) The structure of scientific revolutions. 2nd ed. University of
Chicago Press. USA.
Mullins,
L.J. (2007) Management and Organisational Behaviour. Pearson, London.
McQueen.
A. R and Knussen. C (2002) Research Methods for Social Science: a practical
introduction. Available from:http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=DORhPyHpDgYC&pg=PA1&dq=why+is+important+to+understand+social+science+research&hl=en&ei=IOhGTdmLLZKKhQfKhd2MAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=why%20is%20important%20to%20understand%20social%20science%20research&f=false
[Accessed, 12/01/2011]
Morgan, G., and Smircich, L. (1980) The case for
qualitative research. Academy of
Management Review. Vol. 5. No. 4. Pp. 491-500.
Saunders et al., (2007) Research
Methods for Business Students. Pearson Education Limited. England.
Sayer. A (2000) Realism and Social
Science. Sage. London.
Smith. C and Dainty. P (1991) The management Research Handbook. Routledge.
New York.
Sayer, A.
(2000) Realism and Social Science. Sage. London.
Silverman. D (1970) The Theory of Organisations.
Heinemann. London.
Ramanathan. R. T (2008) The Role of Organisational
Change Management in Offshore Outsourcing of Information Technology Service:
Qualitative Case Studies for a Multinational Pharmaceutical Company. Available
from: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=luZd6PF6i0IC&pg=PA40&dq=social+science+research+positivism+and+social+constructivism&hl=en&ei=k_dPTZ9GwsCEB9Wy5ZgP&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
[Accessed, 07/02/2011]
Whittingham,
C., & Holland, R. (1985). “A framework for theory in social work.” Issues
in Social Work Education, Vol. 5, pp. 25-50.
Willmott.
H (1989) Beyond pragmatic closure in organizational inquiry. Rutledge.
London.
Wood. M and Welch. C (2010) Are ‘Quantitative’ and
‘Qualitative’ Useful Terms for Describing Research. Vol. 5. No 1. Pp 56-71.
No comments:
Post a Comment