Strangers in Paradigms!? Alternatives to Paradigm-Bound Methodology and Methodological Confessionalism
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-24.1.4015Keywords:
qualitative methods, quantitative methods, mixed methods, paradigms, paradigm wars, epistemologyAbstract
In our paper we discuss and criticize an idea which is often taken for granted in methodological discourses about mixed methods: namely that social researchers in general and mixed methods researchers in particular have to adopt a specific epistemological paradigm (a set of beliefs which have to be accepted a priori) before they can meaningfully perform research. By examining different versions of this model of paradigm-bound methodology which Yvonna LINCOLN and Egon GUBA had developed between the 1980s and 2010s, we will discuss implications of the notion paradigm and show that several of the paradigms proposed as the basis of research (e.g., positivism or constructivism) are ill-defined, lack coherence and are only superficially related to actual developments in the history of philosophical thought or contemporary epistemological debates. As an alternative to paradigm-bound methodology we will propose that researchers apply methods in an epistemologically informed way by employing epistemological concepts not as immutable givens but as heuristic devices which are used to identify and solve methodological problems. We will exemplify our approach by means of data from our own mixed methods study in which we simultaneously drew on realist and constructivist concepts to foster the understanding of contradictory statistical results.
Downloads
References
Becker, Howard S. (1963). Outsiders; studies in the sociology of deviance. London: Free Press of Glencoe.
Becker, Howard S. (1967). Whose side are we on?. Social Problems, 14(3), 239-247.
Berger, Peter L. & Luckmann, Thomas (2011 [1966]). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York, NY: Open Road Media.
Bethmann, Stephanie & Niermann, Debora (2015). Crossing boundaries in qualitative research – Entwurf einer empirischen Reflexivität der qualitativen Sozialforschung in Deutschland und den USA. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 16(2), Art. 19, https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-16.2.2216 [Accessed: November 30, 2022].
Blumer, Herbert (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Carnap, Rudolf (1931). Überwindung der Metaphysik durch logische Analyse der Sprache. Erkenntnis, 2, 219-241.
Comte, Auguste (2015 [1848]). A general view of positivism. London: Routledge.
Curtice, John; Clery, Elizabeth; Perry, Jane; Phillips, Miranda & Rahim, Nilufer (2019). British social attitudes: The 36th Report. London: The National Centre for Social Research, https://www.bsa.natcen.ac.uk/media/39363/bsa_36.pdf [Accessed: January 25, 2023].
Denzin, Norman K. (2010a). Moments, mixed methods, and paradigm dialogs. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6), 419-427.
Denzin, Norman K. (2010b). The qualitative manifesto. A call to arms. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
Denzin, Norman K. & Lincoln, Yvonna S. (Eds.) (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dewey, John (1910). How we think. Boston, MA: D.C. Heath & Co.
Duhem, Pierre (1976 [1908]). Physical theory and experiment. In Sandra G. Harding (Ed.), Synthese library: v. 81. Can theories be refuted? Essays on the Duhem-Quine thesis (pp.1-40). Dordrecht-: D. Reidel.
Durkheim, Émile (1950 [1894]). The rules of sociological method. Glencoe, IL.: Free Press.
ESS (2021). European social survey: The ESS9-2018 edition 3.1. Sikt—Norwegian Agency for Shared Services in Education and Research, Norway—Data Archive and distributor of ESS data for ESS ERIC, https://ess-search.nsd.no/en/study/bdc7c350-1029-4cb3-9d5e-53f668b8fa74 [Accessed: January 25, 2023].
Evangelische Kirche Deutschland (2019). Gezählt 2019: Zahlen und Fakten zum kirchlichen Leben, https://www.ekd.de/ekd_de/ds_doc/Gezaehlt_zahlen_und_fakten_2019.pdf [Accessed: August 31, 2022].
EVS (2020). European values study 2017: Integrated dataset (EVS 2017). GESIS, Köln, ZA7500 Datenfile Version 5.0.0, https://doi.org/10.4232/1.13560 [Accessed: January 25, 2023]
Feilzer, Martina Y. (2010). Doing mixed methods research pragmatically: Implications for the rediscovery of pragmatism as a research paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(1), 6-16.
Foerster, Heinz von (1985). Sicht und Einsicht: Versuche zu einer operativen Erkenntnistheorie. Braunschweig: Vieweg.
Friedmann, Johannes (1983). Bemerkungen zum Münchhausen-Trilemma. Erkenntnis, 20(3), 329-340.
GESIS - Leibniz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaften (2019). Allgemeine Bevölkerungsumfrage der Sozialwissenschaften ALLBUS 2018. GESIS Datenarchiv, Köln, ZA5270 Datenfile Version 2.0.0, https://doi.org/10.4232/1.13250 [Accessed: January 25, 2023].
Glasersfeld, Ernst von (1995). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. London: Falmer Press.
Gobo, Giampietro (2023). Mixed methods and their pragmatic approach: Is there a risk of being entangled in a positivist epistemology and methodology? Limits, pitfalls and consequences of a bricolage methodology Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 24(1), Art. 13, https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-24.1.4005.
Goffman, Erving (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York, NY: Anchor Books.
Guba, Egon G. (Ed.) (1990a). The paradigm dialog. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Guba, Egon G. (1990b). The alternative paradigm dialog. In Egon G. Guba (Ed.), The paradigm dialog (pp.17-27). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Guba, Egon G. & Lincoln, Yvonna S. (1988). Do inquiry paradigms imply inquiry methodologies?. In David M. Fetterman (Ed.), Qualitative approaches to evaluating education: The silent scientific revolution (pp.88-115). London: Prager.
Guba, Egon G. & Lincoln, Yvonna S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Norman K. Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp.105-117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Haack, Susan (1976). The pragmatist theory of truth. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 27(3), 231-249.
Hammersley, Martin (1992). What's wrong with ethnography?: Methodological explorations. New York, NY: Routledge.
Hanson, Norwood R. (1958). Patterns of discovery: An inquiry into the conceptual foundations of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hesse-Biber, Sharlene Nagy & Johnson, R. Burke (Eds.) (2015). The Oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed methods research inquiry. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Horkheimer, Max (2010 [1937]). Traditional and critical theory. In Gerard Delanty & Piet Strydom (Eds.), Philosophies of social sciences. The classic and contemporary readings (pp.218-223). Maidenhead: Open University.
Huber, Stefan & Bertelsmann Stiftung (2010). Religionsmonitor der Bertelsmann Stiftung. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann.
Hume, David (2016 [1748]). An enquiry concerning human understanding. In Steven M. Cahn (Ed.), Seven masterpieces of philosophy (pp.191-284). London: Routledge.
James, William (1907). Pragmatism: A new name for some old ways of thinking: Popular lectures on philosophy. London, New York, NY: Longmans Green.
Johnson, R. Burke & Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
Kelle, Udo (2001). Sociological explanations between micro and macro and the integration of qualitative and quantitative methods. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 2(1), Art. 5, https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-2.1.966 [Accessed: November 30, 2022].
Kelle, Udo (2008). Die Integration qualitativer und quantitativer Methoden in der empirischen Sozialforschung: Theoretische Grundlagen und methodologische Konzepte. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag fur Sozialwissenschaften.
Kelle, Udo (2022). Mixed Methods. In Nina Baur & Joerg Blasius (Eds.), Handbuch Methoden der empirischen Sozialforschung (pp.163-177). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Klein, Peter (2008). Contemporary responses to Agrippa's trilemma. In John Greco (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of skepticism (pp.484-509). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kuhn, Thomas S. (1970a). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Kuhn, Thomas S. (1970b). Logic of discovery or psychology of research?. In Imre Lakatos & Alan Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp.1-24). London: Cambridge University Press.
Lakatos, Imre (1970). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In Imre Lakatos & Alan Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp.91-196). London: Cambridge University Press.
Lakatos, Imre & Musgrave, Alan (Eds.) (1970). Criticism and the growth of knowledge. London: Cambridge University Press.
Laudan, Larry; Donovan, Arthur; Laudan, Rachel; Barker, Peter; Brown, Harold; Leplin, Jarrett; Thagard, Paul & Wykstra, Steve (1986). Scientific change: Philosophical models and historical research. Synthese, 69(2), 141-223.
Lincoln, Yvonna S. & Guba, Egon G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Lincoln, Yvonna S. & Guba, Egon G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In Norman K. Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research (pp.163-188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lincoln, Yvonna S. & Guba, Egon G. (2007). Paradigms. In George Ritzer (Ed.), Blackwell encyclopedia of sociology online. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Lincoln, Yvonna S. & Guba, Egon G. (2016). The constructivist credo. Abingdon: Routledge.
Lincoln, Yvonna S.; Lynham, Susan H. & Guba, Egon G. (2011). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, revisited. In Norman K. Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp.97-128). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mach, Ernst (1922). Die Analyse der Empfindungen und das Verhältnis des Physischen zum Psychischen. Jena: G. Fischer.
Masterman, Margaret (1970). The nature of a paradigm. In Imre Lakatos & Alan Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp.59-90). London: Cambridge University Press.
Mayring, Philipp (2001). Combination and integration of qualitative and quantitative analysis. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 2(1), Art. 6, https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-2.1.967 [Accessed: November 30, 2022].
Mead, George H. (1934). Mind, self & society. Chicago, IL.: University of Chicago Press.
Milton, John (2005 [1667]). Paradise lost. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing.
Moore, Terry (2004). Strangers in paradise. Lenoir, NC: Abstract Studio.
Morgan, David L. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 48-76.
Morgan, David L. (2014). Pragmatism as a paradigm for social research. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(8), 1045-1053.
Murphy, John P. & Murphy, Ana R. (1990). Pragmatism: From Peirce to Davidson. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
National Records of Scotland (2014). Statistical bulletin: 2011 Cencus: Key results from releases 2A to 2D, https://www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/media/p4ac0tiv/statsbulletin2.pdf [Accessed: January 25, 2023].
Office for National Statistics (2012). 2011 Census: KS209EW Religion, local authorities in England and Wales, https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20160107112030/http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/publications/re-reference-tables.html?edition=tcm%3A77-286262 [Accessed: January 25, 2023].
Peirce, Charles S. (1878). How to make our ideas clear. Popular Science Quarterly, 12, 286-302
Phillips, Denis C. (1990). Postpositivistic science: Myths and realities. In Egon G. Guba (Ed.), The paradigm dialog (pp.31-45). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Phillips, Denis C. & Burbules, Nicholas C. (2000). Postpositivism and educational research. Philosophy, theory, and educational research. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Popper, Karl R. (1959 [1935]). The logic of scientific discovery. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Popper, Karl R. (1970). Normal science and its dangers. In Imre Lakatos & Alan Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp.51-58). London: Cambridge University Press.
Russell, Bertrand (2009 [1918-1919]). The philosophy of logical atomism. London: Routledge.
Russell, Bertrand (2020 [1992]). William James's conception of truth 1. In Doris Olin (Ed.), William James pragmatism in focus (pp.196-211). London: Routledge.
Seale, Clive (1999). The quality of qualitative research. Introducing qualitative methods. London: Sage.
Sudman, Seymour; Bradburn, Norman M. & Schwarz, Norbert (1996). Thinking about answers: The application of cognitive processes to survey methodology. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Tashakkori, Abbas & Teddlie, Charles (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Thomas, William I. & Thomas, Dorothy S. (1928). The methodology of behavior study. In Alfred A. Knopf (Ed.), The child in America: Behavior problems and programs (pp.553-576). New York, NY: Johnson.
Toulmin, Stephen (1970). Does the distinction between normal and revolutionary science hold water? In Imre Lakatos & Alan Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp.39-48). London: Cambridge University Press.
Toulmin, Stephen E. (1972). The collective use and evolution of concepts. Princeton, NJ.: Princeton University Press.
West, Cornel (1989). The American evasion of philosophy: A genealogy of pragmatism. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Macmillan Academic and Professional.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1958 [1953]). Philosophical investigations (transl. by G.E.M. Anscombe). New York: Macmillan.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Florian Reith, Udo Kelle
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
