Strangers in Paradigms!? Alternativen zu paradigmengebundener Methodologie und methodologischem Konfessionalismus

Autor/innen

  • Udo Kelle Helmut-Schmidt-Universität
  • Florian Reith Helmut-Schmidt-Universität

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-24.1.4015

Schlagworte:

qualitative Methoden, quantitative Methoden, Mixed Methods, Paradigmen, Paradigmenkriege, Epistemologie

Abstract

In unserem Beitrag diskutieren und kritisieren wir eine Idee, deren Geltung in methodologischen Diskursen über Mixed Methods oft als selbstverständlich unterstellt wird, nämlich dass Sozialforscher*innen im Allgemeinen und insbesondere dann, wenn sie Mixed Methods einsetzen, ein spezifisches erkenntnistheoretisches Paradigma (eine Menge von Aussagen, die als a priori gegeben zu akzeptieren sind) zu übernehmen hätten, bevor sie sinnvoll Forschung treiben können. Anhand der Untersuchung verschiedener Versionen dieses Modells einer paradigmengebundenen Methodologie, die Yvonna LINCOLN und EGON Guba in den 1980er und 1990er Jahren entwickelt hatten, möchten wir Implikationen des Begriffs Paradigma diskutieren und zeigen, dass etliche der als Grundlage für Forschung vorgeschlagenen Paradigmen (bspw. Positivismus und Konstruktivismus) unklar definiert, inkohärent und nur oberflächlich mit zeitgenössischen erkenntnistheoretischen Debatten verbunden sind. Als eine Alternative zur paradigmengebundenen Methodologie schlagen wir vor, dass Forschende Methoden in erkenntnistheoretisch informierter Weise nutzen, indem sie erkenntnistheoretische Konzepte nicht als unveränderbare Gegebenheiten betrachten, sondern vielmehr als heuristische Werkzeuge einsetzen, mit deren Hilfe methodologische Probleme identifiziert und gelöst werden können. Wir veranschaulichen unseren Ansatz mithilfe von Daten aus einer eigenen Mixed-Methods-Studie, bei der wir gleichzeitig auf realistische und konstruktivistische Annahmen zurückgegriffen haben, um widersprüchliche statistische Befunde einzuordnen und zu verstehen.

Downloads

Keine Nutzungsdaten vorhanden.

Autor/innen-Biografien

Udo Kelle, Helmut-Schmidt-Universität

Udo KELLE, is professor of social research methods and statistics at Helmut-Schmidt-University Hamburg. His research fields cover the methodology of qualitative and quantitative research and their philosophical foundations, the sociology of the life course and sociology of religion. He has extensively written about the integration of qualitative and quantitative methods in social research. He is currently working on the role of social and political activism in the history of social research. His publications include "'Emergence' vs. 'forcing' of empirical data? A crucial problem of grounded theory reconsidered" (FQS, 2005, https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-6.2.467); "Methodenintegration in der empirischen Sozialforschung" [Integrating Methods in Social Research] (Springer VS, 2008);"Computer-Aided Qualitative Data Analysis: Theory, Methods and Practice" (Sage, 1995); and "Making Inferences in Mixed methods: The Rules of Integration" (together with Christian ERZBERGER, 2003, in Abbas TASHAKKORI & Charles TEDDLIE, Eds., "Sage Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research", pp.457-488, Los Angeles, CA: Sage).

Florian Reith, Helmut-Schmidt-Universität

Florian REITH is a senior researcher in the working group Deutsch [Social Research Methods and Statistics] at Helmut-Schmidt-University Hamburg. His research fields cover the methodology of qualitative and quantitative research and their philosophical foundations, evaluation and quality management in higher education as well as philosophy of education. He is currently working on philosophy of education in the work of POPPER an its relation to ideas usually attributed to DEWEY. His recent publications include "Balancing the Moods: Quality Managers' Perceptions and Actions Against Resistance" (with Markus SEYFRIED, 2019, Higher Education Policy, 32, 71-91); "The Seven Deadly Sins of Quality Management: Trade-Offs and Implications for Further Research" (with Markus SEYFRIED, 2019, Quality in Higher Education, 25(3), 289-303; "Mixed Methods for Research Into Higher Education: Solving the Problem of Institutionalized Introspection?" (with Markus SEYFRIED, 2019, in Jeroen Huisman & Malcolm Tight, Eds., "Theory and Method in Higher Education Research", pp.111-127, Bingley, Emerald).

Literaturhinweise

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.

Veröffentlicht

2023-01-31

Zitationsvorschlag

Kelle, U., & Reith, F. (2023). Strangers in Paradigms!? Alternativen zu paradigmengebundener Methodologie und methodologischem Konfessionalismus. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 24(1). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-24.1.4015