According Jonker & Pennink (2010) a research philosophy, also known as a research paradigm is a set of important assumptions and philosophies that theorise how the world is understood. The philosophies are found on the first layer of the research onion (Saunders et al., 2009). The research philosophies serve as a rational framework directing the conduct of the researcher (Jonker and Pennink, 2010). Quite often the philosophical history commonly remains unspoken in most research, this background impacts on the practice of research.
Authors such as Neuman, (2011); Berry & Otley, (2004); Creswell, (2009); and Saunders et
55
al., (2009) stress the importance of establishing the research paradigm applied in conducting research. It materially effects how a researcher takes on a social study in the way it is presented and understood (Wahyuni, 2012). For this study, the researcher adopted an interpretivist research approach which was most suitable for this type of research due to its ability to reveal reality rather than to convey statistics. Table 3.1 is an overview of the basic fundamental beliefs of research paradigms as they relate to research methodology literature (Saunders et al., 2009:144; Hallebone & Priest, 2009).
Table 3. 1. Fundamental beliefs of research paradigms
RESEARCH PARADIGMS Fundamental
beliefs
Positivism (Naïve realism)
Post-`positivism (Critical Realism)
Interpretivism (Constructivism)
Pragmatism
Ontology: the researchers view on the
nature of reality
Single reality, Reality is apart from the researcher.
No single reality, Reality is subjective and multiple, Interpreted through social conditioning.
Reality is created by individuals in groups,
Subjective, may modify, multiple.
Social real life issues,
The truth is what matters,
A methodology is selected that will best answer the research question.
Epistemology:
the view on what is noted as satisfactory information
Observer is independent of undertaken
research,
Focus on reliable and usable tools to uncover
phenomena, Factual,
Only evident phenomena can provide trustworthy information, Factual,
Observer is independent of undertaken
research,
Focus on
discovering underlying meaning.
Focus is detailed on the situation, and the reality behind these details.
The best method to use is the one that solves the problem the best
Axiology: the role of values in research that shape the narrative
Value-free research, Research is
undertaken in a value-free way, The researcher is independent of the data and upholds an objective position.
Value-laden research, The researcher has a biased viewpoint on social views, experiences and childhood.
Value-bond research, The researcher is part of what is being researched, and is inseparable from subject matter therefore
subjective.
Value-bound research, Goal-orientated, Researcher
adopts an objective and
subjective perspective.
56 Research
Methodology:
Procedure used to acquire knowledge
Quantitative Quantitative or Qualitative
Qualitative Quantitative and qualitative Mixed methods
Source: Adapted from (Saunders et al., 2009:144)
3.3.1. Positivist
According to Neuman (2011) positivist researchers pursue data to establish lawful generalisations or a nomothetic overview. This is done by conducting value-free research to quantify a social phenomenon. The belief of positivists is that several researchers conducting a study with the same problem will be likely to obtain comparable results. This is done by cautiously utilizing arithmetical assessments and implementing a similar research processes in examining a large sample (Creswell 2009). A mutual belief of positivists is that a universal generalisation can be adopted across contexts; this is now known as Naïve Realism (Wahyuni, 2012).
3.3.2. Post-positivists
Post-positivists critique the notion of complete truth in social science research, especially when studying the way in which humans behave. Likewise, the post-positivists are also accustomed to generalisation, but acknowledge that understanding is an outcome of social conditioning. This process is known as the Critical Realist stance. This means that knowledge of social realism should be understood in a certain perspective of significant law or vigorous social configurations which have produced the apparent phenomena within the social world (Wahyuni, 2012).
3.3.3. Interpretivism
Interpretivism, unlike postpositivism, lends itself to what is known as constructivism.
Interpretivist researchers believe that reality is created by social artists and people‟s views of it (Hennink, Hutter and Bailey, 2011). They recognise that people‟s upbringings, opinions and understandings aid the continuous construction of realism taking place through social dealings. Hennink et al., (2011) further stated that social realism can change and have numerous perceptions. According to Wahyuni (2012) interpetivists prefer to interact and have discussions with learned participants. Interpetivists favour working with qualitative data instead of quantitative data. Qualitative data provides quality descriptions of social concepts unlike the generalisation or nomonethic methodology implemented by postpositivist researchers (Neuman, 2011). Interpretivists adopt a descriptive form of analysis to describe
57
the social reality being examined, this approach is also known as idiographic method (Neuman 2011).
Sekaran and Bougie (2016) noted that the „interpretivist‟ paradigm emphasises the necessity of putting analysis in context. The interpretive paradigm is about understanding the world from personal experiences of people. This study is situated in the interpretivist paradigm.
This paradigm uses qualitative methods such as in-depth interviews, and depends on the link between the researcher and subject (Sekaran & Bougie, 2016). The researcher also chose this paradigm as it would assist understand the EPWP from the subjective experiences of the respondents who have direct contact with the programme.
3.3.4. Pragmatism
Based on Creswell‟s (2013) study, pragmatism is not confined to one viewpoint of reality.
Pragmatic researchers are free of choice. They are can select the approaches, methods, and processes of research that can be tailored to the purpose of their study (Creswell, 2013).
Pragmatist researchers prefer applying both qualitative and quantitative data; this is because it allows for superior understanding of social reality (Wahyuni, 2012). There are different types of pragmatists, researchers adopting this research paradigm focus on the findings of the research rather than on the precursor condition as seen in post-positivist paradigm (Creswell 2013). Pragmatists do not have a set philosophy on what makes good research, instead they believe that research grounded on either unbiased, noticeable phenomenon or subjective meanings holds out the prospect of creating credible research (Sekaran & Bougie, 2016).
Pragmatists believe that more focus should be directed towards the research problem and towards apprehending the problem, than focusing on which methodology to use (Creswell, 2013). Pragmatists are also called mixed methods researchers; they look to various approaches to gathering and examining data instead of selecting one methodology. They believe that multiple methods best address a research problem (Creswell, 2013).