This document discusses the differences between theoretical frameworks and conceptual frameworks in research. It begins by providing examples of three students conducting research on street children but approaching it from different disciplinary perspectives of sociology, psychology, and education, and thus having different theoretical/conceptual frameworks.
It then defines key terms like theory, concept, theoretical framework, and conceptual framework. It argues that a theoretical framework typically guides deductive research through existing theories and literature, while a conceptual framework may emerge through inductive research to develop a conceptual model from the data. Examples are provided to illustrate the distinction between theoretical and conceptual frameworks.
The role of theory in research on the education and learning of adults5ncoal
This document discusses theories related to research on adult education and learning. It provides a brief history of the field, noting key figures and concepts like andragogy. It also examines debates around how to conceptualize adult education, including whether it should be viewed as a theoretical field that draws on other disciplines, or a practical field. Additionally, the document analyzes four academic journals to explore current theories being used in adult education research, such as critical pedagogy, post-structural perspectives, and transformative learning. It concludes by calling for strengthening the research community to allow for more diverse theoretical development.
Comprehensive inductive and deductive research approaches are explained. Topics include research paradigm i.e. ontology, epistemology and methodology, theory and its characteristics, research design procedures, research objective statements, operationalization and questionnaire design, different research types (quantitative, qualitative, experimental, phenomenal, descriptive, etc.), and research quality, i.e. validity, reliability, generalizability, sampling, etc. by the use of pictorial illustrations that make the study of business research simpler. These slides are suitable for Bachelor, Master and phD students.
This document discusses research questions and outputs. It defines a research question and provides examples. It also discusses different types of research outputs including constructs, models, methods, and instantiations. Finally, it summarizes Jarvinen's taxonomy of research methods which categorizes approaches based on whether they study reality or focus on the utility of artifacts. The taxonomy includes mathematical, conceptual-analytical, theory-testing, theory-creating, artifacts-building, and artifacts-evaluating approaches.
This document provides an overview of quantitative and qualitative research methods. It discusses key concepts in research methods, including the definition of research, methodological phases, and methods. It then describes quantitative versus qualitative methods. Quantitative methods aim to develop models and hypotheses through measurement and testing. They were originally developed in the natural sciences. Qualitative methods were developed in the social sciences to study social and cultural phenomena through methods like case studies, ethnography, and grounded theory. The document also discusses philosophical perspectives in research, including positivism, interpretivism, and critical theory.
This document provides an overview of qualitative research, outlining some of its key features and philosophical underpinnings. It discusses how qualitative research focuses on understanding people's experiences and interpretations of the world. The document then contrasts qualitative research with quantitative research, noting that qualitative research rejects the positivist model used in natural sciences. It explores some of the philosophical debates around different research paradigms, such as objectivism and interpretivism. Finally, it discusses Thomas Kuhn's work on paradigms and how some researchers believe this helped spur a paradigm shift towards qualitative research in the social sciences.
The document discusses research philosophy and approaches, outlining different philosophies like positivism, interpretivism, and realism. It then explains deduction and induction as the two main research approaches, with deduction testing theory through hypotheses and induction building theory from data. Finally, it discusses research design and strategies, highlighting the importance of objectives, data collection sources, and constraints in research design.
A diagnosis of tenets of the research process what is it to know anythingAlexander Decker
This summary provides an overview of a journal article that discusses philosophical underpinnings of the research process. The article examines different views on the nature of knowledge and how philosophical assumptions guide research approaches. It describes the distinction between a priori and a posteriori knowledge, and how tacit and explicit knowledge contribute to understanding phenomena. Researchers are said to conform to established research traditions and paradigms in systematically approaching problems, though philosophical positions may differ on what constitutes reliable knowledge.
The document discusses the definition and nature of computer science. It states that computer science is the systematic study of algorithmic processes that describe and transform information. The field uses the scientific paradigm of forming and testing hypotheses through experimentation. Computer science qualifies as an exact science that studies natural and artificial information processes using a systematized body of knowledge and is used for prediction and verification. Computing is now considered a third leg of science alongside theory and experimentation.
The role of theory in research on the education and learning of adults5ncoal
This document discusses theories related to research on adult education and learning. It provides a brief history of the field, noting key figures and concepts like andragogy. It also examines debates around how to conceptualize adult education, including whether it should be viewed as a theoretical field that draws on other disciplines, or a practical field. Additionally, the document analyzes four academic journals to explore current theories being used in adult education research, such as critical pedagogy, post-structural perspectives, and transformative learning. It concludes by calling for strengthening the research community to allow for more diverse theoretical development.
Comprehensive inductive and deductive research approaches are explained. Topics include research paradigm i.e. ontology, epistemology and methodology, theory and its characteristics, research design procedures, research objective statements, operationalization and questionnaire design, different research types (quantitative, qualitative, experimental, phenomenal, descriptive, etc.), and research quality, i.e. validity, reliability, generalizability, sampling, etc. by the use of pictorial illustrations that make the study of business research simpler. These slides are suitable for Bachelor, Master and phD students.
This document discusses research questions and outputs. It defines a research question and provides examples. It also discusses different types of research outputs including constructs, models, methods, and instantiations. Finally, it summarizes Jarvinen's taxonomy of research methods which categorizes approaches based on whether they study reality or focus on the utility of artifacts. The taxonomy includes mathematical, conceptual-analytical, theory-testing, theory-creating, artifacts-building, and artifacts-evaluating approaches.
This document provides an overview of quantitative and qualitative research methods. It discusses key concepts in research methods, including the definition of research, methodological phases, and methods. It then describes quantitative versus qualitative methods. Quantitative methods aim to develop models and hypotheses through measurement and testing. They were originally developed in the natural sciences. Qualitative methods were developed in the social sciences to study social and cultural phenomena through methods like case studies, ethnography, and grounded theory. The document also discusses philosophical perspectives in research, including positivism, interpretivism, and critical theory.
This document provides an overview of qualitative research, outlining some of its key features and philosophical underpinnings. It discusses how qualitative research focuses on understanding people's experiences and interpretations of the world. The document then contrasts qualitative research with quantitative research, noting that qualitative research rejects the positivist model used in natural sciences. It explores some of the philosophical debates around different research paradigms, such as objectivism and interpretivism. Finally, it discusses Thomas Kuhn's work on paradigms and how some researchers believe this helped spur a paradigm shift towards qualitative research in the social sciences.
The document discusses research philosophy and approaches, outlining different philosophies like positivism, interpretivism, and realism. It then explains deduction and induction as the two main research approaches, with deduction testing theory through hypotheses and induction building theory from data. Finally, it discusses research design and strategies, highlighting the importance of objectives, data collection sources, and constraints in research design.
A diagnosis of tenets of the research process what is it to know anythingAlexander Decker
This summary provides an overview of a journal article that discusses philosophical underpinnings of the research process. The article examines different views on the nature of knowledge and how philosophical assumptions guide research approaches. It describes the distinction between a priori and a posteriori knowledge, and how tacit and explicit knowledge contribute to understanding phenomena. Researchers are said to conform to established research traditions and paradigms in systematically approaching problems, though philosophical positions may differ on what constitutes reliable knowledge.
The document discusses the definition and nature of computer science. It states that computer science is the systematic study of algorithmic processes that describe and transform information. The field uses the scientific paradigm of forming and testing hypotheses through experimentation. Computer science qualifies as an exact science that studies natural and artificial information processes using a systematized body of knowledge and is used for prediction and verification. Computing is now considered a third leg of science alongside theory and experimentation.
About your research methodology grounded theory. rica viljoen. eskomDr Rica Viljoen
Presentation made at research workshop of the Da Vinci Institute hosted at Eskom Research Conference. A unique integration of grounded theory and systems thinking are presented.
Grounded theory is a qualitative research method that uses a systematic process of data collection and inductive analysis to develop a theory about a phenomenon. The key aspects of grounded theory are that data collection and analysis occur simultaneously to allow codes, concepts, and categories to emerge from the data rather than testing a predetermined hypothesis. Grounded theory was developed in the 1960s by sociologists Glaser and Strauss and focuses on uncovering social processes through exploring relationships and behaviors. It has since evolved, with differing approaches emerging between Glaser and Strauss.
This document discusses research philosophy and different philosophical schools of thought. It covers ontology, epistemology, and axiology. Ontology examines the nature of reality, whether social phenomena are objective or subjective. Epistemology studies the nature and sources of knowledge. Axiology assesses the role of values in research. Rationalism and empiricism are discussed as different views on the origins of knowledge. Positivism, realism, interpretivism, and pragmatism are presented as four common research philosophies. Positivism adheres to an objective, detached approach focused on facts and quantification.
This document discusses three main research paradigms: positivism, anti-positivism (interpretivism), and critical theory. Positivism takes a naturalistic and objective approach to knowledge through observation and quantification. Anti-positivism sees knowledge as subjective and socially constructed. Critical theory examines how historical forces restrict freedom and uncover ideological justifications. The document outlines key characteristics of each paradigm such as their views on ontology, epistemology, methodology, and strengths/weaknesses.
This document discusses different perspectives on ontology and epistemology and how they affect qualitative data analysis and coding. It addresses realist, contextualist, and radical constructivist views. A realist perspective believes findings are waiting to be discovered in the data. Contextualism holds that knowledge is local and provisional based on the research context. Radical constructivism challenges the idea of absolute foundations for knowledge and objectivity. The document evaluates how these perspectives approach coding, reliability, and researcher subjectivity.
This document provides an overview of theoretical perspectives and methodologies used in learning design research. It discusses how researchers come from a variety of disciplines including education, computer science, psychology, and more. Common theoretical perspectives discussed include sociocultural theories like cultural historical activity theory, communities of practice, and actor network theory. Methodologies used include qualitative approaches like ethnography, case studies, and action research as well as quantitative content analysis and evaluation. The relationship between theories, methods, and different epistemological stances is also examined.
MIX methode- building better theory by bridging the quantitative-qualitative ...politeknik NSC Surabaya
This document discusses the benefits of using qualitative research methods to build theory. It begins by distinguishing between quantitative and qualitative research paradigms in terms of their underlying philosophies, goals, and methods. The key difference is that quantitative research aims for replication and theory testing, while qualitative research aims to understand social phenomena from the perspectives of participants to develop new theories.
The document then provides an overview of qualitative research methods for data collection and analysis, focusing on grounded theory building. Grounded theory allows researchers to generate a detailed understanding of a phenomenon and develop a logically compelling analysis that identifies constructs and relationships to advance theory. The document argues that combining qualitative and quantitative methods can fully develop understanding and refine theories of organizational phenomena.
This document discusses the pragmatic approach to research. It defines pragmatism as using the method best suited to address the research problem. Pragmatism allows researchers to freely use quantitative and qualitative methods. The philosophy of pragmatism is that reality is determined by practical consequences and any useful way of thinking can lead to solutions. Pragmatism combines deductive and inductive reasoning and allows for both objective and subjective viewpoints. Mixed methods research integrates quantitative and qualitative data. Strengths of pragmatism include flexibility, while limitations include additional time and effort needed.
Introduction to Legal Research MethodologyPreeti Sikder
Learning Objective: After completion of this lesson students will
a) learn about the definition of research;
b) identify the basic characteristics of research
This document provides an overview of ethnographic research and grounded theory. It defines ethnographic research as the study of cultural patterns through observation and interviews in natural settings. Grounded theory is described as developing a theory through systematic data collection and analysis, without preconceived hypotheses. Key aspects of both approaches discussed include qualitative data collection methods, iterative coding processes to conceptualize the data, and allowing theories to emerge from the data through constant comparison and saturation.
This document provides an overview of the qualitative research method known as phenomenology. It defines phenomenology as describing the meaning of lived experiences around a phenomenon from several individuals' perspectives. The document outlines the philosophical underpinnings of phenomenology, including its constructivist viewpoint and focus on understanding socially constructed realities. It also reviews key aspects of phenomenology such as its process, methods, data collection and analysis techniques.
This document provides an introduction to the second edition of the book "Method in Social Science" by Andrew Sayer. It discusses the need to bridge the gap between philosophical debates and empirical social research. The introduction emphasizes that conceptualization and theorizing are important aspects of method that are often overlooked. It also argues that views of causation based on regularities have limited social science, and realist philosophy provides an alternative view of causation based on causal powers. The introduction presents social research as dealing with multi-dimensional objects that cannot be isolated experimentally, placing importance on abstraction to identify constituent processes. It advocates taking a broad view of method that incorporates social theory, philosophy of social science, and research practices.
The document discusses the debate around whether theory or empiricism should come first in cross-cultural analysis research. Some argue for a deductive, theory-first approach where hypotheses are derived from existing theories. Others argue for an inductive, empiricism-first approach where patterns in the data shape theories. The author examines examples of studies taking both approaches and ultimately argues that theory should precede empiricism to provide a framework for properly analyzing and interpreting empirical data and accounting for confounding variables. Starting with empiricism risks bias and manipulation of statistics to support predetermined conclusions.
Research refers to a careful investigation or inquiry to gain new knowledge, especially through search for facts. It involves systematically dividing a problem into elements, analyzing them in light of assumptions, and moving from the known to the unknown. Research is significant as it promotes scientific thinking, logical organization, and underpins government policies through providing facts in fields like business and economics. It leads to progress through encouraging doubt and further inquiry.
Mixedmethods basics: Systematic, integrated mixed methods and textbooks, NVIVOWendy Olsen
I define mixed methods and show that systematic mixed methods can be well organised, with transparent data coding and case-wise data held carefully for hypothesis testing. I list the relevant textbooks. I challenge the schism idea that qualitative methods are intrinsically opposed to what is usually done with quantitative methods. I show how an integrated approach can be begun, giving examples. Suitable to professional researchers, those doing focus groups, and those wanting more background for their qualitative research to come from quantitative data.
Phenomenological research aims to describe and understand lived experiences through qualitative methods like interviews and observation. It seeks to understand perspectives from the view of participants rather than explain with hypotheses. Analysis involves reading data to identify key themes within and across participant responses. Themes are then organized and used to structure summaries of participants' views on various topics. While findings from single cases illuminate individual experiences, analyzing multiple participants strengthens inferences about common factors and their effects.
Grounded theory is a qualitative research method introduced in 1967 by Glaser and Strauss. It involves developing a theory grounded in data that is systematically gathered and analyzed through the constant comparative method. This iterative process involves collecting data, analyzing through coding and memo writing, and sorting memos to develop conceptual categories to generate an emergent theory. The theory should fit and work to explain the phenomenon under study. Grounded theory challenges assumptions that qualitative research is not systematic or rigorous and aims to develop conceptual theories rather than just descriptive case studies.
This document provides an overview of sociological research approaches, including the scientific method and interpretive frameworks. It discusses key aspects of the scientific method such as formulating questions, reviewing existing literature, developing hypotheses about relationships between independent and dependent variables, and emphasizing reliability and validity. Interpretive frameworks are also covered, noting they seek to understand social worlds through in-depth perspectives rather than generalizable results. Research methods like surveys, experiments, and field research are mentioned as tools sociologists use to systematically study human behavior.
The positivist approach relies on quantitative methods like experiments and statistical analysis to test hypotheses and discover generalizable truths. It assumes an objective reality can be observed and measured. The interpretivist approach uses qualitative methods like interviews and case studies to understand phenomena within their specific contexts. It sees reality as socially constructed and allows for multiple perspectives. Both approaches agree research aims to generate new knowledge but diverge on their methods and philosophical assumptions.
Sujay Inductive, nomothetic approaches and grounded theory FINAL FINAL FINAL ...Sujay Rao Mandavilli
This document discusses inductive and deductive approaches to theory building in social sciences research. It recommends using both nomothetic (law-building) and idiographic (case-specific) approaches, as well as grounded theory which generates theories from real-world data. The document aims to promote more inclusive globalized approaches to increase the quality and impact of social sciences research. It relates this topic to the author's previous work on responsibilities of researchers and principles like exceptionism, uncertainty, and cross-cultural research design.
About your research methodology grounded theory. rica viljoen. eskomDr Rica Viljoen
Presentation made at research workshop of the Da Vinci Institute hosted at Eskom Research Conference. A unique integration of grounded theory and systems thinking are presented.
Grounded theory is a qualitative research method that uses a systematic process of data collection and inductive analysis to develop a theory about a phenomenon. The key aspects of grounded theory are that data collection and analysis occur simultaneously to allow codes, concepts, and categories to emerge from the data rather than testing a predetermined hypothesis. Grounded theory was developed in the 1960s by sociologists Glaser and Strauss and focuses on uncovering social processes through exploring relationships and behaviors. It has since evolved, with differing approaches emerging between Glaser and Strauss.
This document discusses research philosophy and different philosophical schools of thought. It covers ontology, epistemology, and axiology. Ontology examines the nature of reality, whether social phenomena are objective or subjective. Epistemology studies the nature and sources of knowledge. Axiology assesses the role of values in research. Rationalism and empiricism are discussed as different views on the origins of knowledge. Positivism, realism, interpretivism, and pragmatism are presented as four common research philosophies. Positivism adheres to an objective, detached approach focused on facts and quantification.
This document discusses three main research paradigms: positivism, anti-positivism (interpretivism), and critical theory. Positivism takes a naturalistic and objective approach to knowledge through observation and quantification. Anti-positivism sees knowledge as subjective and socially constructed. Critical theory examines how historical forces restrict freedom and uncover ideological justifications. The document outlines key characteristics of each paradigm such as their views on ontology, epistemology, methodology, and strengths/weaknesses.
This document discusses different perspectives on ontology and epistemology and how they affect qualitative data analysis and coding. It addresses realist, contextualist, and radical constructivist views. A realist perspective believes findings are waiting to be discovered in the data. Contextualism holds that knowledge is local and provisional based on the research context. Radical constructivism challenges the idea of absolute foundations for knowledge and objectivity. The document evaluates how these perspectives approach coding, reliability, and researcher subjectivity.
This document provides an overview of theoretical perspectives and methodologies used in learning design research. It discusses how researchers come from a variety of disciplines including education, computer science, psychology, and more. Common theoretical perspectives discussed include sociocultural theories like cultural historical activity theory, communities of practice, and actor network theory. Methodologies used include qualitative approaches like ethnography, case studies, and action research as well as quantitative content analysis and evaluation. The relationship between theories, methods, and different epistemological stances is also examined.
MIX methode- building better theory by bridging the quantitative-qualitative ...politeknik NSC Surabaya
This document discusses the benefits of using qualitative research methods to build theory. It begins by distinguishing between quantitative and qualitative research paradigms in terms of their underlying philosophies, goals, and methods. The key difference is that quantitative research aims for replication and theory testing, while qualitative research aims to understand social phenomena from the perspectives of participants to develop new theories.
The document then provides an overview of qualitative research methods for data collection and analysis, focusing on grounded theory building. Grounded theory allows researchers to generate a detailed understanding of a phenomenon and develop a logically compelling analysis that identifies constructs and relationships to advance theory. The document argues that combining qualitative and quantitative methods can fully develop understanding and refine theories of organizational phenomena.
This document discusses the pragmatic approach to research. It defines pragmatism as using the method best suited to address the research problem. Pragmatism allows researchers to freely use quantitative and qualitative methods. The philosophy of pragmatism is that reality is determined by practical consequences and any useful way of thinking can lead to solutions. Pragmatism combines deductive and inductive reasoning and allows for both objective and subjective viewpoints. Mixed methods research integrates quantitative and qualitative data. Strengths of pragmatism include flexibility, while limitations include additional time and effort needed.
Introduction to Legal Research MethodologyPreeti Sikder
Learning Objective: After completion of this lesson students will
a) learn about the definition of research;
b) identify the basic characteristics of research
This document provides an overview of ethnographic research and grounded theory. It defines ethnographic research as the study of cultural patterns through observation and interviews in natural settings. Grounded theory is described as developing a theory through systematic data collection and analysis, without preconceived hypotheses. Key aspects of both approaches discussed include qualitative data collection methods, iterative coding processes to conceptualize the data, and allowing theories to emerge from the data through constant comparison and saturation.
This document provides an overview of the qualitative research method known as phenomenology. It defines phenomenology as describing the meaning of lived experiences around a phenomenon from several individuals' perspectives. The document outlines the philosophical underpinnings of phenomenology, including its constructivist viewpoint and focus on understanding socially constructed realities. It also reviews key aspects of phenomenology such as its process, methods, data collection and analysis techniques.
This document provides an introduction to the second edition of the book "Method in Social Science" by Andrew Sayer. It discusses the need to bridge the gap between philosophical debates and empirical social research. The introduction emphasizes that conceptualization and theorizing are important aspects of method that are often overlooked. It also argues that views of causation based on regularities have limited social science, and realist philosophy provides an alternative view of causation based on causal powers. The introduction presents social research as dealing with multi-dimensional objects that cannot be isolated experimentally, placing importance on abstraction to identify constituent processes. It advocates taking a broad view of method that incorporates social theory, philosophy of social science, and research practices.
The document discusses the debate around whether theory or empiricism should come first in cross-cultural analysis research. Some argue for a deductive, theory-first approach where hypotheses are derived from existing theories. Others argue for an inductive, empiricism-first approach where patterns in the data shape theories. The author examines examples of studies taking both approaches and ultimately argues that theory should precede empiricism to provide a framework for properly analyzing and interpreting empirical data and accounting for confounding variables. Starting with empiricism risks bias and manipulation of statistics to support predetermined conclusions.
Research refers to a careful investigation or inquiry to gain new knowledge, especially through search for facts. It involves systematically dividing a problem into elements, analyzing them in light of assumptions, and moving from the known to the unknown. Research is significant as it promotes scientific thinking, logical organization, and underpins government policies through providing facts in fields like business and economics. It leads to progress through encouraging doubt and further inquiry.
Mixedmethods basics: Systematic, integrated mixed methods and textbooks, NVIVOWendy Olsen
I define mixed methods and show that systematic mixed methods can be well organised, with transparent data coding and case-wise data held carefully for hypothesis testing. I list the relevant textbooks. I challenge the schism idea that qualitative methods are intrinsically opposed to what is usually done with quantitative methods. I show how an integrated approach can be begun, giving examples. Suitable to professional researchers, those doing focus groups, and those wanting more background for their qualitative research to come from quantitative data.
Phenomenological research aims to describe and understand lived experiences through qualitative methods like interviews and observation. It seeks to understand perspectives from the view of participants rather than explain with hypotheses. Analysis involves reading data to identify key themes within and across participant responses. Themes are then organized and used to structure summaries of participants' views on various topics. While findings from single cases illuminate individual experiences, analyzing multiple participants strengthens inferences about common factors and their effects.
Grounded theory is a qualitative research method introduced in 1967 by Glaser and Strauss. It involves developing a theory grounded in data that is systematically gathered and analyzed through the constant comparative method. This iterative process involves collecting data, analyzing through coding and memo writing, and sorting memos to develop conceptual categories to generate an emergent theory. The theory should fit and work to explain the phenomenon under study. Grounded theory challenges assumptions that qualitative research is not systematic or rigorous and aims to develop conceptual theories rather than just descriptive case studies.
This document provides an overview of sociological research approaches, including the scientific method and interpretive frameworks. It discusses key aspects of the scientific method such as formulating questions, reviewing existing literature, developing hypotheses about relationships between independent and dependent variables, and emphasizing reliability and validity. Interpretive frameworks are also covered, noting they seek to understand social worlds through in-depth perspectives rather than generalizable results. Research methods like surveys, experiments, and field research are mentioned as tools sociologists use to systematically study human behavior.
The positivist approach relies on quantitative methods like experiments and statistical analysis to test hypotheses and discover generalizable truths. It assumes an objective reality can be observed and measured. The interpretivist approach uses qualitative methods like interviews and case studies to understand phenomena within their specific contexts. It sees reality as socially constructed and allows for multiple perspectives. Both approaches agree research aims to generate new knowledge but diverge on their methods and philosophical assumptions.
Sujay Inductive, nomothetic approaches and grounded theory FINAL FINAL FINAL ...Sujay Rao Mandavilli
This document discusses inductive and deductive approaches to theory building in social sciences research. It recommends using both nomothetic (law-building) and idiographic (case-specific) approaches, as well as grounded theory which generates theories from real-world data. The document aims to promote more inclusive globalized approaches to increase the quality and impact of social sciences research. It relates this topic to the author's previous work on responsibilities of researchers and principles like exceptionism, uncertainty, and cross-cultural research design.
Sujay Inductive, nomothetic approaches and grounded theory FINAL FINAL FINAL ...Sujay Rao Mandavilli
This paper evaluates both inductive and deductive methods with respect to theory building particularly
in the social sciences. The former is an approach for drawing conclusions by proceeding from the specific
to the general, while as per the latter, a hypothesis is usually developed and subsequently tested based
on further evidence. This paper also evaluates nomothetic approaches in opposition to idiographic or
stand-alone approaches with respect to theorization or theory-formulation as well, and recommends
that a combination of the two be used. It also discusses the application of grounded theory in social
sciences research besides other approaches to theorization as well. While choosing a appropriate
research method is the prerogative of the researcher, based on the research question involved, the
researcher’s personal inclinations, besides time and cost considerations, this paper hopes to generate
awareness of more globalized and inclusive approaches to scientific endeavour. This is as such, our fifth
paper on the philosophy of science, and extends our earlier work which primarily focused on the
importance of the social duties of every researcher and scholar, the principle of exceptionism or the
sociological ninety ten rule, the certainty uncertainty principle, and the importance of cross-cultural
research design. This paper is also therefore the logical culmination of all our earlier endeavours, and
forms an integral part of our “Globalization of science” movement, with particular emphasis on the
social sciences.
This document discusses the role and importance of theory and concepts in educational research. It argues that theory helps researchers ask significant questions, approach research rigorously and imaginatively, and shed light on taken-for-granted circumstances. While theory can also close down thinking and marginalize practices, it can empower research by recovering and claiming knowledge. The document provides examples of concepts commonly used in educational research like identity, pedagogy and knowledge, and influential theorists like Habermas, Foucault and Bourdieu. It emphasizes that theory should align with and inform research questions, methodology, data collection and analysis.
This document provides an overview of case study research methods. It defines a case study as an in-depth analysis of an individual or small group that draws conclusions only about that specific participant or context. The document discusses the history of case studies, including their use in fields like sociology and anthropology. It also examines different types of case studies and how they are used in educational applications, such as teaching methods at business schools. Design considerations for case studies include identifying a theoretical perspective like individual, organizational, or social theories.
This document provides an overview of research methodology. It discusses that research methodology is the systematic process of solving a research problem. It involves understanding which research methods and techniques are applicable to specific problems. The chapter then describes the procedural aspects used in the research process, including research philosophy, philosophical worldviews, research approach, research design, data collection strategies, data analysis, and ethical considerations. It presents the figure showing the methodological structure of research. Finally, it discusses various philosophical worldviews including postpositivism that guide researchers in determining the appropriate research design based on the research question.
This document discusses inductive and deductive approaches to theory building in social sciences research. It recommends using inductive approaches that draw conclusions from specific observations to broader generalizations. It also recommends combining nomothetic (law-building) and idiographic (stand-alone) approaches. Grounded theory is discussed as an approach that generates theories from real-world data. While research methods depend on factors like research questions and time/cost constraints, the document advocates for more inclusive globalized approaches to improve scientific output quality.
Research Dilemmas Paradigms, Methods and MethodologyJairo Gomez
The document discusses issues faced by early career researchers, including confusion created by textbooks and articles that present research methodology as either qualitative or quantitative. It argues that discussions should include mixed methods and address the perceived dichotomy. The document then defines and discusses various research paradigms, including positivist/postpositivist, interpretivist/constructivist, transformative, and pragmatic. It explores how paradigms relate to methodology and methods, noting that certain paradigms are commonly associated with either qualitative or quantitative approaches.
The document discusses the research process for graduate students completing a dissertation. It describes the process as trekking into a dense forest where students often feel lost. The key stages of research are presented as a recursive "research wheel" with six steps: empirical observation, proposition, conceptual framework, research questions/hypotheses, data collection, and data analysis. Mastering both abstract conceptualization skills and practical research skills is important for navigating the challenging dissertation process. An approved dissertation proposal constitutes an agreement that the proposed study may be completed.
Grounded theory is a qualitative research method that aims to generate theory from data. The document discusses grounded theory's development by Glaser and Strauss and its key assumptions. It proposes using grounded theory to study workplace bullying in small organizations as a research topic. Both the merits and disadvantages of using grounded theory are discussed, such as the risk of producing a poorly designed framework if not fully understanding grounded theory's paradigm and methodology.
This document provides an introduction to research, covering key areas such as the meaning of research, purpose of research, types of research, and the scientific method of inquiry. Research is defined as a systematic process of asking questions and answering them through objective and organized methods such as surveys and experiments. The main purposes of research are to describe phenomena, explain relationships, make predictions, and gain control over events. Educational research specifically aims to better understand and improve teaching and learning. The scientific method emphasizes objective, empirical, and systematic procedures to minimize bias.
Role of theory in research by priyadarshinee pradhanPriya Das
This document discusses the role of theory in research. It defines research as a systematic process of investigation to discover new facts or verify existing facts. Theory is defined as a framework that helps observe and understand phenomena by connecting variables. There are two approaches to theory - inductive theory develops concepts from data, while deductive theory uses existing theory to guide research. The relationship between theory and research is bidirectional, as theory informs research and research can validate or refine theory over time based on empirical evidence.
This document provides an overview of case study research methodology. It defines case study research as descriptive research that involves an in-depth analysis of real-life situations and contexts. Case studies emphasize detailed analysis of limited cases or events to understand a complex issue. They can extend experience and add strength to what is already known through previous research. Case studies involve collecting data from multiple sources over an extended period of time to provide an in-depth understanding of a case rather than generalizing to a larger population. They can be qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods in nature.
Theoretical and Conceptual framework in ResearchIkbal Ahmed
A presentation on Theoretical framework and conceptual framework of a research.From this presentation you can know -
1) About theory and 4 types of theory
2) How to choose a suitable theoretical framework for your research
3) How to make a good conceptual framework for your research
4) Find out Independent variable and dependent variable of your problem statement
5) Relation between TF & CF relative to Quantitative and Qualitative methodology
The document discusses issues faced by early career researchers regarding research paradigms, methods, and methodology. It argues that while research textbooks and articles often present qualitative and quantitative research as dichotomous, the literature supports mixed methods. The authors review literature on this topic and provide definitions of key terms like paradigm to assist early career researchers in navigating these debates and making informed decisions about their own research.
The role of theory in researchProf Brian van WykPO.docxkathleen23456789
The role of theory in research
Prof Brian van Wyk
POSTGRADUATE ENROLMENT AND THROUGHPUT (PET)
*
Outline for workshopWhat is theory?Characteristics of theoryFunctions of theory in researchHow to evaluate the quality of a theory (explanation)Theory in research OR research and theory?
*
What is theory?A model or framework for observation and understandingshapes both what we see and how we see it;allows the researcher to make links between the abstract and the concrete, the theoretical and the empirical, thought statements and observational statements.
Generalising statements that assert a connection between two or more types of phenomena
Explains and predicts the relationship between variables
A system of interconnected abstractions or ideas that condenses and organises knowledge about the world
*
Characteristics of theoryTheory guides research and organises its ideas. i.e. bricks lying around haphazardly in the brickyard: ‘facts’ of different shapes and sizes have no meaning unless they are drawn together in a theoretical or conceptual framework.
Empirically relevant
Always tentative, never proven
Becomes stronger as more supporting evidence is gathered; provides a context for predictions
Has the capacity to generate new research.
*
Theory vs. hypothesisAn hypothesis is an educated guess. It usually predicts the relationship between two or more variables.
Hypotheses are more specific than theories.
Multiple hypotheses may relate to one theory.
*
Remember theory can operate on different levelsMicro-level theory seeks to explain behaviour at the level of the individual or family environment e.g. psychology – Frustration-Aggression hypothesis or Sternberg’s theory of love
Meso-level theory seeks to explain the interactions of micro-level organisms e.g. social institutions, organisations, communities
Macro-level theory seeks to explain behaviour at the level of large groups of people e.g. ethnicity, class, gender – Conflict Theory
*
How to evaluate a theoryIs the theory or explanation logical and coherent?Is it clear and parsimonious?Does it fit the available data?Does it provide testable claims?Have theory-based predictions been tested and supported?Has it survived numerous attempts by researchers to identify problems with it or to falsify it?Does it work better than competing or rival theories or explanations?
*
Is it general enough to apply to more than one place, situation, or person?
Can practitioners use it to control or influence things in the world a good theory of teaching helps teachers to positively influence student learning; a good theory of counseling helps counselors to positively influence their clients’ mental health
*
Theory and research OR
theory in research?There is a two-way relationship between theory and research.
Social theory informs our understanding of issues, which, in turn, assists us in making research decisions and making sense of the world.
The experience of.
A Case for Qualitative Research In the Social Studies.pdfWendy Belieu
This document presents six research papers that exemplify a qualitative research approach in social studies. The first paper argues that a qualitative research attitude is well-suited to the goals of a reflective, critical social studies curriculum. The second paper analyzes recent social studies research to determine trends toward qualitative or quantitative methods. The third discusses the relationship between models of teacher professional development programs and metaphors of educational change. The fourth describes political influences on social studies curriculum development in Alberta, Canada from 1975-1979. The fifth interprets how a teacher's ideology shapes their interpretation of the curriculum. The sixth examines different approaches to teaching values in social studies. Overall, the papers aim to advance qualitative research as a valid methodology for exploring important educational questions in
1. A case study involves an in-depth examination of a particular instance or instances of a phenomenon, such as an educational program, within its real-life context. It focuses on understanding the interactions and processes within the bounded system being studied.
2. A case study emphasizes understanding the interrelationships between various attributes of the unit of analysis, which can be an individual, group, institution, or other social phenomenon. It seeks to provide deep insight into the life and behaviors of the unit through direct observation and analysis rather than indirect approaches.
3. Data collection in a case study focuses on a specific topic or research question and is gathered over an extended period of time through various sources like interviews, documents, and observations
The document discusses the key steps in formulating a research problem and conducting social science research. It explains that research begins by identifying a problem to study, which is then narrowed into a specific research question. The researcher reviews previous literature to learn what is already known about the topic and to help formulate hypotheses. Hypotheses are tentative explanations for relationships between variables that will be tested through empirical research. The goal of clearly defining the research problem, variables, and hypotheses is to guide the researcher and focus the scope of the study.
AUTHOR YIN CHAPTER 1Chapter 1 Plan· Identify the relev.docxcelenarouzie
AUTHOR: YIN
CHAPTER 1
Chapter 1: Plan
· Identify the relevant situation for doing a case study, compared with other research methods
· Understand the twofold definition of a case study inquiry
· Address the traditional concerns over case study research
· Decide whether to do a case study
Abstract
You want to study something relevant but also exciting—and you want to use an acceptable if not esteemed social science method. Doing a “case study” strikes your fancy, but how you might do a good one remains a challenge, compared with doing an experiment, survey, history, or archival analysis (as in economic or statistical modeling). You are intrigued and want to learn more about doing a case study.
This chapter suggests that you might favor choosing case study research, compared with the others, when (1) your main research questions are “how” or “why” questions, (2) you have little or no control over behavioral events, and (3) your focus of study is a contemporary (as opposed to entirely historical) phenomenon—a “case.” The chapter then offers a common definition to be applied to the ensuing case study. Among the variations in case studies, yours can include single or multiple cases, can even be limited to quantitative evidence if desired, and can be part of a mixed-methods study.
Properly doing a case study means addressing five traditional concerns—conducting the research rigorously, avoiding confusion with nonresearch case studies (i.e., popular case studies, teaching-practice case studies, and case records), arriving at generalized conclusions if desired, carefully managing your level of effort, and understanding the comparative advantage of case study research. The overall challenge makes case study research “hard,” although it has classically been considered a “soft” form of research.
Being Ready For The Challenge, And Setting High Expectations
Doing case study research remains one of the most challenging of all social science endeavors. This book will help you—whether an experienced or emerging social scientist—to deal with the challenge. Your goal is to design good case studies and to collect, present, and analyze data fairly. A further goal is to bring your case study to closure by composing a compelling article, report, book, or oral presentation.
Do not underestimate the extent of the challenge. Although you may be ready to design and do case study research, others may espouse and advocate other modes of social science inquiry. Similarly, prevailing federal or other research funds may favor methods other than case studies. As a result, you may need to have ready responses to some inevitable questions and set high expectations for yourself.
Following a clear methodological path.
First and foremost, you should explain how you are devoting yourself to following a clear methodological path. For instance, a conventional starting place would be to review literature and define your case study’s research questions. Alternatively, however, you.
This presentation by OECD, OECD Secretariat, was made during the discussion “The Intersection between Competition and Data Privacy” held at the 143rd meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 13 June 2024. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found at oe.cd/ibcdp.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Yong Lim, Professor of Economic Law at Seoul National University School of Law, was made during the discussion “Artificial Intelligence, Data and Competition” held at the 143rd meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 12 June 2024. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found at oe.cd/aicomp.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
Carrer goals.pptx and their importance in real lifeartemacademy2
Career goals serve as a roadmap for individuals, guiding them toward achieving long-term professional aspirations and personal fulfillment. Establishing clear career goals enables professionals to focus their efforts on developing specific skills, gaining relevant experience, and making strategic decisions that align with their desired career trajectory. By setting both short-term and long-term objectives, individuals can systematically track their progress, make necessary adjustments, and stay motivated. Short-term goals often include acquiring new qualifications, mastering particular competencies, or securing a specific role, while long-term goals might encompass reaching executive positions, becoming industry experts, or launching entrepreneurial ventures.
Moreover, having well-defined career goals fosters a sense of purpose and direction, enhancing job satisfaction and overall productivity. It encourages continuous learning and adaptation, as professionals remain attuned to industry trends and evolving job market demands. Career goals also facilitate better time management and resource allocation, as individuals prioritize tasks and opportunities that advance their professional growth. In addition, articulating career goals can aid in networking and mentorship, as it allows individuals to communicate their aspirations clearly to potential mentors, colleagues, and employers, thereby opening doors to valuable guidance and support. Ultimately, career goals are integral to personal and professional development, driving individuals toward sustained success and fulfillment in their chosen fields.
1.) Introduction
Our Movement is not new; it is the same as it was for Freedom, Justice, and Equality since we were labeled as slaves. However, this movement at its core must entail economics.
2.) Historical Context
This is the same movement because none of the previous movements, such as boycotts, were ever completed. For some, maybe, but for the most part, it’s just a place to keep your stable until you’re ready to assimilate them into your system. The rest of the crabs are left in the world’s worst parts, begging for scraps.
3.) Economic Empowerment
Our Movement aims to show that it is indeed possible for the less fortunate to establish their economic system. Everyone else – Caucasian, Asian, Mexican, Israeli, Jews, etc. – has their systems, and they all set up and usurp money from the less fortunate. So, the less fortunate buy from every one of them, yet none of them buy from the less fortunate. Moreover, the less fortunate really don’t have anything to sell.
4.) Collaboration with Organizations
Our Movement will demonstrate how organizations such as the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, National Urban League, Black Lives Matter, and others can assist in creating a much more indestructible Black Wall Street.
5.) Vision for the Future
Our Movement will not settle for less than those who came before us and stopped before the rights were equal. The economy, jobs, healthcare, education, housing, incarceration – everything is unfair, and what isn’t is rigged for the less fortunate to fail, as evidenced in society.
6.) Call to Action
Our movement has started and implemented everything needed for the advancement of the economic system. There are positions for only those who understand the importance of this movement, as failure to address it will continue the degradation of the people deemed less fortunate.
No, this isn’t Noah’s Ark, nor am I a Prophet. I’m just a man who wrote a couple of books, created a magnificent website: http://www.thearkproject.llc, and who truly hopes to try and initiate a truly sustainable economic system for deprived people. We may not all have the same beliefs, but if our methods are tried, tested, and proven, we can come together and help others. My website: http://www.thearkproject.llc is very informative and considerably controversial. Please check it out, and if you are afraid, leave immediately; it’s no place for cowards. The last Prophet said: “Whoever among you sees an evil action, then let him change it with his hand [by taking action]; if he cannot, then with his tongue [by speaking out]; and if he cannot, then, with his heart – and that is the weakest of faith.” [Sahih Muslim] If we all, or even some of us, did this, there would be significant change. We are able to witness it on small and grand scales, for example, from climate control to business partnerships. I encourage, invite, and challenge you all to support me by visiting my website.
Why Psychological Safety Matters for Software Teams - ACE 2024 - Ben Linders.pdfBen Linders
Psychological safety in teams is important; team members must feel safe and able to communicate and collaborate effectively to deliver value. It’s also necessary to build long-lasting teams since things will happen and relationships will be strained.
But, how safe is a team? How can we determine if there are any factors that make the team unsafe or have an impact on the team’s culture?
In this mini-workshop, we’ll play games for psychological safety and team culture utilizing a deck of coaching cards, The Psychological Safety Cards. We will learn how to use gamification to gain a better understanding of what’s going on in teams. Individuals share what they have learned from working in teams, what has impacted the team’s safety and culture, and what has led to positive change.
Different game formats will be played in groups in parallel. Examples are an ice-breaker to get people talking about psychological safety, a constellation where people take positions about aspects of psychological safety in their team or organization, and collaborative card games where people work together to create an environment that fosters psychological safety.
The importance of sustainable and efficient computational practices in artificial intelligence (AI) and deep learning has become increasingly critical. This webinar focuses on the intersection of sustainability and AI, highlighting the significance of energy-efficient deep learning, innovative randomization techniques in neural networks, the potential of reservoir computing, and the cutting-edge realm of neuromorphic computing. This webinar aims to connect theoretical knowledge with practical applications and provide insights into how these innovative approaches can lead to more robust, efficient, and environmentally conscious AI systems.
Webinar Speaker: Prof. Claudio Gallicchio, Assistant Professor, University of Pisa
Claudio Gallicchio is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Computer Science of the University of Pisa, Italy. His research involves merging concepts from Deep Learning, Dynamical Systems, and Randomized Neural Systems, and he has co-authored over 100 scientific publications on the subject. He is the founder of the IEEE CIS Task Force on Reservoir Computing, and the co-founder and chair of the IEEE Task Force on Randomization-based Neural Networks and Learning Systems. He is an associate editor of IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems (TNNLS).
• For a full set of 530+ questions. Go to
https://skillcertpro.com/product/servicenow-cis-itsm-exam-questions/
• SkillCertPro offers detailed explanations to each question which helps to understand the concepts better.
• It is recommended to score above 85% in SkillCertPro exams before attempting a real exam.
• SkillCertPro updates exam questions every 2 weeks.
• You will get life time access and life time free updates
• SkillCertPro assures 100% pass guarantee in first attempt.
This presentation by Juraj Čorba, Chair of OECD Working Party on Artificial Intelligence Governance (AIGO), was made during the discussion “Artificial Intelligence, Data and Competition” held at the 143rd meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 12 June 2024. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found at oe.cd/aicomp.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Thibault Schrepel, Associate Professor of Law at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam University, was made during the discussion “Artificial Intelligence, Data and Competition” held at the 143rd meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 12 June 2024. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found at oe.cd/aicomp.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by OECD, OECD Secretariat, was made during the discussion “Artificial Intelligence, Data and Competition” held at the 143rd meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 12 June 2024. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found at oe.cd/aicomp.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Tim Capel, Director of the UK Information Commissioner’s Office Legal Service, was made during the discussion “The Intersection between Competition and Data Privacy” held at the 143rd meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 13 June 2024. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found at oe.cd/ibcdp.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Nathaniel Lane, Associate Professor in Economics at Oxford University, was made during the discussion “Pro-competitive Industrial Policy” held at the 143rd meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 12 June 2024. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found at oe.cd/pcip.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
Gamify it until you make it Improving Agile Development and Operations with ...Ben Linders
So many challenges, so little time. While we’re busy developing software and keeping it operational, we also need to sharpen the saw, but how? Gamification can be a way to look at how you’re doing and find out where to improve. It’s a great way to have everyone involved and get the best out of people.
In this presentation, Ben Linders will show how playing games with the DevOps coaching cards can help to explore your current development and deployment (DevOps) practices and decide as a team what to improve or experiment with.
The games that we play are based on an engagement model. Instead of imposing change, the games enable people to pull in ideas for change and apply those in a way that best suits their collective needs.
By playing games, you can learn from each other. Teams can use games, exercises, and coaching cards to discuss values, principles, and practices, and share their experiences and learnings.
Different game formats can be used to share experiences on DevOps principles and practices and explore how they can be applied effectively. This presentation provides an overview of playing formats and will inspire you to come up with your own formats.
This presentation by OECD, OECD Secretariat, was made during the discussion “Pro-competitive Industrial Policy” held at the 143rd meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 12 June 2024. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found at oe.cd/pcip.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
This presentation by Professor Giuseppe Colangelo, Jean Monnet Professor of European Innovation Policy, was made during the discussion “The Intersection between Competition and Data Privacy” held at the 143rd meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 13 June 2024. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found at oe.cd/ibcdp.
This presentation was uploaded with the author’s consent.
2. 186 SITWALA IMENDA
that there was something about schooling that
repelled some children, and because of relent-
less pressure from home (amongst other factors)
forcing them to keep attending school, the af-
fected children rather ended up on the streets.
So, in developing her research problem, she lo-
cated her thinking within a number of theoreti-
cal perspectives, including school governance,
school curriculum, curricular relevance and im-
plementation, the teacher-learner interface, ac-
cessibilityof schools (for example, distances the
children had to travel, usually walking, to and
from school), school environment – including
possibilities of bullying, as well as school sup-
port and sensitivity to learners’ individual and
collective needs.
As one may expect, these three studies, car-
ried out on the same accessible population, dif-
fered in more respects than they were similar –
from problem statements and research questions,
all the way to their findings, conclusions and
recommendations. The main reason for this was
that they each “looked at the circumstances of
the same street children from different ‘points of
view’ or ‘theoretical / conceptual frameworks’.”
Objective
This paper explores the two terms: theoreti-
cal and conceptual frameworks, with a view to
shedding some light on their respective mean-
ings, within the context of research in both the
natural and social sciences – particularly with
reference toconceptual meaning, purpose, meth-
odology and scope of application.
Understandingthe KeyConcepts
In attempting to address the objective of this
study, a closer look at the following terms is
essential, namely, theory, concept, conceptual
framework and theoretical framework. This will
help decipher if any conceptual differences ex-
ist among these terms. However, since these
terms are to be defined within the context of
research, it is deemed necessary to start with a
definition of research, before these terms are
defined and discussed.
Research
Many definitions of research abound. De
Vos et al. (2005: 41) see research as a “systemat-
ic, controlled, empirical, and critical investiga-
tion of [natural / social] phenomena, guided by
theory and hypotheses about the presumed re-
lations” among such phenomena. (Parenthesis
and emphasis added). Accordingly, in research,
subjective beliefs are “checked against objec-
tive reality” (deVos et al. 2005: 36). Quite signif-
icant to this paper is the highlighted portion of
this definition, which specificallystates that re-
search is “guided by theory”. The suggestion
here is that without ‘theory’ research would lack
direction – and this explains why in every re-
search, one is expected to present one’s ‘theo-
retical’ framework – as the students in the above
exemplar did.
However, whereas theory directs systematic
‘controlled, empirical’ research, the place ofthe-
oryin ‘less-controlled’ and ‘non-empirical’types
of research could be conceptuallydifferent (Lie-
hr and Smith 1999). In fact, most generative re-
search is conceptually different from research
based on hypothesis-testing or hypothetico-
deductive reasoning. In effect, most generative
research often seeks to develop theories that
are ‘grounded in the data collected’ and arising
from discovering ‘what is reallygoing on in the
field’(Liehr and Smith 1999).As Cline (2002: 2)
observes, “in the case of qualitative studies, a
theoretical framework maynot be explicitly ar-
ticulated since qualitative inquiry typically is
often oriented toward grounded theory devel-
opment in the first place”. However, although
the place of theory in different research para-
digms mayvary, still ‘theory’appears to be cen-
tral to all forms of research. The question is:
what then is ‘theory’?
Theory
Aspects such as ‘explaining’ and ‘making
predictions’ are among the most common fea-
tures of the definition of ‘theory’. For example,
Fox and Bayat (2007: 29) define theory as “a set
of interrelated propositions, concepts and defi-
nitions that present a systematic point of view
of specifying relationships between variables
with a view to predicting and explaining phe-
nomena”. Likewise, Liehr and Smith (1999: 8)
opine the following about theory:
A theory is a set of interrelated concepts,
which structure a systematic view of phenome-
na for the purpose of explaining or predicting.
A theory is like a blueprint, a guide for model-
3. THEORETICAL VERSUS CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS 187
ing a structure. A blueprint depicts the elements
of a structure and the relation of each element
to the other, just as a theory depicts the con-
cepts, which compose it and the relation of con-
cepts with each other.
Further, Liehrand Smith(1999:2)makea con-
nection between theory and practice in their
contention that the former guidesthe latter while,
on the other hand, “practice enables testing of
theory and generates questions for research;
research contributes to theory-building, and
selecting practice guidelines”. Accordingly,
these two authors posit that a careful interweav-
ing of theoryand research could reinforce what
is learned through practice, to create the knowl-
edge fabric of the given discipline.
Chinn and Kramer (1999: 258)define a theo-
ry as an “expression of knowledge….a creative
and rigorous structuring of ideas that project a
tentative, purposeful, and systematic view of
phenomena”. More traditionally, a theory has
been defined as “a systematic abstraction of re-
alitythat serves some purpose …A creative and
rigorous structuring of ideas that project a ten-
tative purposeful, and systematic view of phe-
nomenon” (Chinn and Kramer 1995: 72). To
Hawking (1988: 9), “a theory is a good theoryif
it satisfies two requirements: It must accurately
describe a large class of observations on the
basis of a model which contains only a few arbi-
traryelements, and it must make definite predic-
tions about the results of future observations”.
He goes on to state that “any physical theory is
always provisional, in the sense that it is only a
hypothesis; you can never prove it. No matter
how many times the results of experiments agree
with some theory, you can never be sure that
the next time the result will not contradict the
theory. On the other hand, you can disprove a
theory by finding even a single observation
which disagrees with the predictions of the the-
ory.”
So, from the above definitions, the three
major defining characteristics ofa theoryare that
it (a) is “a set of interrelated propositions, con-
cepts and definitions that present a systematic
point of view”; (b) specifies relationships be-
tween / among concepts; and (c) explains and /
or makes predictions about the occurrence of
events, based on the specified relationships.
According to Wacker (1998: 363), a theory
has four components, namely (a) definition of
terms, concepts or variables, (b) a domain to
which the theory is applicable, (c) a set of rela-
tionships amongst the variables, and (d) specif-
ic predictive claims. Putting all these elements
together, a theory is therefore a careful outline
of ‘the precise definitions in a specific domain
to explain why and how the relationships are
logically tied so that the theory gives specific
predictions” (Wacker 1998: 363-364). Thus, a
good theory is taken to be one which gives a
very clear and precise picture of events of the
domain it seeks to explain. As such, “a theory’s
precision and limitations are founded in the def-
initions of terms, the domain of the theory, the
explanation of relationships, and the specific
predictions” (Wacker 1998: 364). Quite impor-
tantly, Wacker (1998: 365) outlines the ‘virtues’
and ‘key features’ of a good theory as being (a)
uniqueness – that is, being distinguishable from
others; (b) conservatism – a theory persists un-
til a superior theoryreplaces it; (c) generalisabil-
ity– the greater the area a theorycan be applied
to, the more powerful it is; (d) fecundity– a the-
orythat is more fertile in generating newmodels
and hypotheses is better than one that gener-
ates fewer; (e) parsimony – other things being
equal, the fewer the assumptions the better; (f)
internal consistency – a theory that has identi-
fied all the relationships on the basis of which
adequate explanations are rendered; (g) empiri-
cal riskiness – any empirical test of a theory
should be risky; refutation must be possible for
a good theory; and (h) abstraction – the theory
is independent of time and space, usually
achieved by adding more relationships.
However, often-times, the meaning of the
term ‘theory’ could also be understood from its
frequent contrasting with the construct of ‘prac-
tice’ (Greek: praxis). Thus, when one exalts the
status of a particular theory, one’s detractors
would respond by saying something like ‘but
that’s just theory’, implying that what one finds
in practice is different – suggesting, in turn, that
practice is what really counts.
However, regarding the tension between the-
ory and practice, there is a view that, over time,
there has been a narrowing of conceptual and
operational meanings between the two. Further,
it is argued that, although theories in the arts
and philosophy still refer to ideas rather than
directly observable empirical phenomena, in
modern science the terms theory and scientific
theory are understood to refer to proposed ex-
planations or empirical phenomena. This is best
4. 188 SITWALA IMENDA
exemplified by the following bold statement
madebytheAmericanAcademyfor theAdvance-
ment ofScience (2010: 1):
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated
explanation of some aspect of the natural world,
based on a body of facts that have been repeat-
edly confirmed through observation and exper-
iment. Such fact-supported theories are not
“guesses” but reliable accounts of the real
world. The theory of biological evolution is more
than “just a theory.” It is as factual an explana-
tion of the universe as the atomic theory of mat-
ter or the germ theory of disease. Our under-
standing of gravity is still a work in progress.
But the phenomenon of gravity, like evolution,
is an accepted fact (The National Academies
1999: 2).
Although this statement has been criticised
for a number of reasons, including its blurring of
the lines between theoryand fact, the statement
itself conveys the Science Academy’s evolved
sense of what they take a theory to be – as they
further aver:
In everyday language, a theory means a
hunch or a speculation. Not so in science. In
science, the word ‘theory’ refers to a compre-
hensive explanation of an important feature of
nature that is supported by many facts gath-
ered over time. (Quoted by Weisenmiller 2008:
2)
Theories have also been defined in respect
of their scope, as well as the relative level of
abstractness of their concepts and propositions.
Thus, theories may be classified as grand, mid-
dle range or juts as concepts (Smith 2008). Mid-
dle range theories are seen as bigger than indi-
vidual concepts, but narrower in scope than
grand theories and are composed of a limited
number of concepts that relate to a limited as-
pect of the real world. The concepts and propo-
sitions of middle range theories are empirically
measurable(Smith andLiehr 1999). Grand theo-
ries are seen as broadest in scope, less abstract
than conceptual models, but comprising con-
cepts which are, nonetheless, still relativelyab-
stract and general. However, the relationships
of the concepts in grand theories cannot be test-
ed empirically because theyare, still, too gener-
al – sometimes even consisting ofsub-theories.
Overall, it is held that the defining character-
istic of a scientific theoryis that it makes falsifi-
able or testable predictions - the relevance and
specificity of which determine how potentially
useful the theory is. Accordingly, a purported
theory that makes no predictions which can be
studied or systematicallyfollowed through is of
no use.
Concept
Hornby (2005: 5) contends that “defining
concepts is not an innocent exercise. Meanings/
interpretations ofconcepts are largelyinfluenced
by their context. Concepts reflect theoretical
concerns and ideological conflicts. Definitions
have their defenders and critics”. Nonetheless,
be this as it may, Liehr and Smith (1999: 7) have
ventured to give a definition of a concept as “an
image or symbolic representation of an abstract
idea”. Chinn and Kramer (1999: 252) see con-
cepts as the components of theory which “con-
vey the abstract ideas within a theory”; they
also see a concept as a “complex mental formu-
lation of experience.”
ResearchFramework
First, it is important to understand what a
‘framework’ is, within the context of research.
Liehr and Smith (1999: 13) see a framework for
research as a structure that provides “guidance
for the researcher as study questions are fine-
tuned, methods for measuring variables are se-
lected and analyses are planned”. Once data
are collected and analysed, the framework is used
as a mirror to check whether the findings agree
with the framework or whether there are some
discrepancies; where discrepancies exist, a ques-
tion is asked as to whether or not the framework
can be used to explain them.
Referring back to the exemplar concerning
the three student researchers, within their broad
fields they each chose and/or identified ‘frame-
works’ to guide them in explaining and interpret-
ing the circumstances of their investigations re-
garding the street children, with respective lev-
els of academic integrityand acceptability. This
is what constitutes a conceptual or theoretical
framework –that is, the specific perspective
which a given researcher uses to explore, inter-
pret or explain events or behaviour of the sub-
jects or events s/he is studying.
Conceptual Versus Theoretical Frameworks
Having briefly cast our eye on the defini-
tions of (a) theory and (b) concept, it may now
5. THEORETICAL VERSUS CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS 189
be opportune to attempt to distinguish between
the two notions of theoretical and conceptual
framework.
Theoretical Framework
A theoretical framework refers to the theory
that a researcher chooses to guide him/her in
his/her research. Thus, a theoretical framework
is the application of a theory, or a set of con-
cepts drawn from one and the same theory, to
offer an explanation of an event, or shed some
light on a particular phenomenon or research
problem. This could refer to, for instance, the
Set theory, evolution, quantum mechanics, par-
ticulate theory of matter, or similar pre-existing
generalisation – such as Newton’s laws of mo-
tion, gas laws, that could be applied to a given
research problem, deductively.
ConceptualFramework
On the other hand, a researcher may opine
that his/her research problem cannot meaning-
fullybe researched in reference to only one the-
ory, or concepts resident within one theory. In
such cases, the researcher may have to “syn-
thesize” the existing views in the literature con-
cerning a given situation – both theoretical and
from empirical findings. The synthesis may be
called a model or conceptual framework, which
essentially represents an ‘integrated’ way of
looking at the problem (Liehr and Smith 1999).
Such a model could then be used in place of a
theoretical framework. Thus, a conceptual
framework may be defined as an end result of
bringing together a number of related concepts
to explain or predict a given event, or give a
broader understanding of the phenomenon of
interest – or simply, of a research problem. The
process of arriving at a conceptual framework is
akin to an inductive process wherebysmall indi-
vidual pieces (in this case, concepts) are joined
together to tell a bigger map of possible rela-
tionships. Thus, a conceptual framework is de-
rived from concepts, in-so-far as a theoretical
framework is derived from a theory. Schemati-
cally, this maybe represented as in Figure 1.
Hence, according to Figure 1, whereas a
whole theory may serve as one’s theoretical
framework, a conceptual framework is normally
of limited scope – carefully put together in the
form of a conceptual model, and immediately
applicable to a particular study. In general, one
finds that whereas in the natural sciences one
may be guided by, say, the theory of evolution
in conducting an investigation that involves clas-
sification of unknown fossil specimens, one of-
ten finds that in the social sciences, there is no
single theory that one can meaningfully use in
dealing with, say, academic achievement or chal-
lenges of poverty. The illustrations given in Fig-
ures 2 and 3 serve as exemplars of this distinc-
tion. Figure 2 represents an example of a theo-
retical framework.
In this example, all the concepts that are used
toinvestigate a research problem are drawn from
one theoretical perspective –that is, Newton’s
Second Law of Motion. [Just for the record,
Newton’s Second Law of Motion states that ‘the
acceleration of an object as produced by a net
force is directly proportional to the magnitude
of the net force, in the same direction as the net
force, and inverselyproportional to the mass of
the object’, (Meirovitch 1997: 2)].
ConceptualFramework
Figure 3 presents an example of a conceptu-
al framework. In Figure 3, the researcher came
up with a synthesis of concepts and perspec-
tives drawn from many sources. This is what
makes this a ‘conceptual’ framework, and what
differentiates it from a theoretical framework.
To summarise, therefore, both conceptual
and theoretical frameworks represent an inte-
grated understanding of issues, within a given
field of study, which enables the researcher to
address a specific research problem. These the-
oretical perspectives guide the individual re-
Fig. 1. Derivation of conceptual and theoretical
frameworks
Conceptual
Framework
Theoretical
Framework
A Set of Related
Concepts
Theory
6. 190 SITWALA IMENDA
Fig. 2. An example of a Theoretical Framework
Newton’s Second Law of Motion
Force Gravity Vectors
AccelerationMassWeight
Motion
searcher in terms of specific research questions,
hypotheses or objectives – leading to a better
directed review of literature, the selection / iden-
tification of appropriate research methods, and
the interpretation of results. Thus, we can have
a number of researchers working on the same
research problem, as illustrated above with re-
spect to the three studies about street children,
where each one of the students investigated the
problem from different theoretical / conceptual
frameworks, and each coming up with legitimate
findings and knowledge claims at the end of it
all.
Purpose
In general, both ‘conceptual’ and ‘theoreti-
cal’ frameworks refer to the epistemological
paradigm a researcher adopts in looking at a
given research problem – as Liehr and Smith
(1999: 12) point out, “each of these terms refers
to a structure” which guides the researcher. In
thesame regard, Evans (2007: 8) opines that both
“theoretical and conceptual frames” help the
reader understand the reasons why a given re-
searcher decides to study a particular topic, the
assumptions s/he makes, how s/he conceptual-
ly grounds his/her approach, the scholars s/he
is in dialogue with, who s/he agrees and dis-
agrees with. Hence, Evans opines that these
two constructs serve the same purpose, sug-
gesting that it is extremely important for every
researcher to identify or develop, as well as de-
scribe an appropriate conceptual or theoretical
framework. Without one, a study lacks proper
direction and a basis for pursuing a fruitful re-
view ofliterature, as well as interpreting and ex-
plaining the findings accruing from the investi-
gation.
METHODOLOGY AND OBSERVATIONS
Methodological considerations refer to the
research design and the process of addressing
a given research problem – including the ap-
proach toliterature review, the nature of the data
to be collected, analysed and interpreted. Inev-
itably, these issues also touch on the broader
discussion of research paradigms, given that the
types of research problems pursued, methods
of investigation employed, the types of data
collected, analysed and interpreted – as well as
the underlying epistemological assumptions
under the twodominant research paradigms (that
is, qualitative and quantitative) are typicallynot
the same. Thus, starting with the type of re-
search problem to be addressed, it may be said
that whereas some research problems may be
studied through processes and procedures that
meaningfully produce findings “arrived at by
statistical procedures or other means of quanti-
fication”, studies involving people’s ways oflife,
“lived experiences, behaviors, emotions, and
feelings as well as about organizational func-
tioning, social movements, cultural phenomena,
and interactions between nations” (Strauss and
Corbin, 1998: 10-11) are better studies in ways
that generate qualitative data that are mainly
descriptive and interpretative. In this regard,
Strauss and Corbin (1998: 11) opine that al-
though some researchers quantify qualitative
data, obtained through techniques normally as-
sociated with qualitative research – such as in-
terviews and direct observation techniques,
qualitative data analysis refers “not to the quan-
tifying of qualitative data but rather to a non-
mathematical process of interpretation, carried
out for the purpose of discovering concepts and
relationships in raw data and then organizing
these into a theoretical explanatory scheme”.
Smith (2008: 4) defines paradigms as
“schools of shared assumptions, values and
views about the phenomena addressed in par-
ticular sciences”. The Quantitative and Qualita-
tive research paradigms are the most commonly
cited by researchers (Denzin, 1978; Dzurec and
Abraham 1993; Johnson and Onwuegbuzie,
2004; Guba and Lincoln 2005). However,
Schwandt (2000: 206) has taken issue with these
“paradigm wars,” calling into question the need
for this division or differentiation. In his words,
“it is highly questionable whether such a dis-
tinction is anylonger meaningful for helping us
7. THEORETICAL VERSUS CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS 191
understand the purpose and means of human
inquiry” (2000: 210). Schwandt (2000: 210) fur-
ther observes as follows:
All research is interpretive, and we face a
multiplicity of methods that are suitable for dif-
ferent kinds of understandings. So the tradi-
tional means of coming to grips with one’s iden-
tity as a researcher by aligning oneself with a
particular set of methods (or being defined in
one’s department as a student of “qualitative”
or “quantitative” methods) is no longer very
useful. If we are to go forward, we need to get
rid of that distinction.
This point is supported by Johnson et al.
(2007: 117) in their observation that “antago-
nism between paradigms is unproductive”. But
they go further and posit that the integration of
these two research paradigms gives birth to a
third research paradigm:
Mixed methods research is an intellectual
and practical synthesis based on qualitative
and quantitative research; it is the third meth-
odological or research paradigm (along with
qualitative and quantitative research). It rec-
ognizes the importance of traditional quanti-
tative and qualitative research but also offers
a powerful third paradigm choice that often
will provide the most informative, complete,
balanced, and useful research results.
(Johnson et al. 2007: 129).
In the light ofthe above views ofSchwandt’s,
as well as Johnson et al. it appears reasonable to
lay some emphasis on the “mixed methods”
(blended) research paradigm –which Johnson, et
al. (2007: 113) define as “an approach to knowl-
edge (theory and practice) that attempts to con-
sider multipleviewpoints, perspectives, positions,
and standpoints (always including the stand-
points ofqualitative and quantitative research)”.
Fig. 3. An example of a conceptual framework
[Source: Coetzee A 2009. Overcoming alternative conceptions concerning interference and diffraction of waves. D.
Ed thesis, Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria, p. 135. Reproduced with permission.]
8. 192 SITWALA IMENDA
Quantitative
Research Problem
Qualitative
Research Problem
Synthesize Relevant
Concepts from
Various Sources (CF)
(Inductive Approach)
Identify Reevant
Theoretical Structure
(TF)
(Deductive Approach)
Apply TF to
Research Problem
Apply CF to
Research Problem
Fig. 4. Typical relationships between the Theo-
retical Framework (TF) and Conceptual Frame-
work (CF) relative to the qualitative and quanti-
tative research paradigms.
Although the mixed methods research de-
sign in not new, it represents a new movement
seeking to formalize “the practice of using multi-
pleresearch methods” (Johnson et al. 2007: 113).
Johnson et al. further report that in the history
of the development of research methods, this
research design was first associated with the
term multiple operationalism, as far back as the
1950s. Later the term ‘triangulation’ was coined
– which is defined by Denzin (in Johnson et al.
2007: 114) as “the combination of methodolo-
gies in the study of the same phenomenon. Ac-
cordingly, mixed methods research is the class
of research where the researcher mixes or com-
bines quantitative and qualitative research tech-
niques, methods, approaches, and concepts or
language into a single study or set of related
studies”. Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004: 15)
earlier stated the following in defining mixed
methods research:
If you visualize a continuum with qualita-
tive research anchored at one pole and quanti-
tative research anchored at the other, mixed
methods research covers the large set of points
in the middle area. If one prefers to think cate-
gorically, mixed methods research sits in a new
third chair, with qualitative research sitting
on the left side and quantitative research sit-
ting on the right side”.
So, it may then be said that we no longer
have just twodominant research paradigms, but
three – with the third one having a much greater
potential for explaining realitymore fullythan is
possible when only one research paradigm is
used.
Now, relating this to the process of research,
it is not contentious to state that theoretical or
conceptual frameworks form the cruxof the liter-
ature review component of any research project.
Thus, in attempting todecipher the methodolog-
ical difference between theoretical and concep-
tual frameworks it is important to look at the
ways in which a particular study is conducted
with regard to the two dimension sets of deduc-
tive and inductive development and presenta-
tion of literature review.
Evidently, research in the behavioural sci-
ences has, over the years, borrowed heavilyfrom
the natural sciences. Thus, one would argue
that the term ‘theoretical framework’ as used in
the social sciences has its genesis in the ‘scien-
tific method’, which appears to have greatlyin-
fluenced the social sciences, particularly in the
earlier years. Had it not been for this, most re-
search in the social sciences would probably
not have used the term because what appears to
be applicable in most cases is ‘conceptual frame-
work’. In thesame vein, it mayalso be important
to reflect on the use of the deductive-inductive
research process within the quantitative and
qualitative research paradigms
Starting with the deductive-inductive ap-
proaches, de Vos et al. (2005: 47) opine that de-
duction “moves from the general to the specific.
It moves from a pattern that might be logicallyor
theoretically expected to observations that test
whether the expected pattern actually occurs”.
In this vein, Liehr and Smith (1999) associate
most theoretical frameworks with quantitative
research, which in turn tends to rely on deduc-
tive reasoning, whereas most conceptual frame-
works are associated with qualitative research –
mainly utilising inductive reasoning. Thus, a
researcher following a deductive approach starts
by specifying the theory guiding the study – in
the process, citing the main points emphasized
in the theory, and illustrating how the main as-
pects of the theory relate to the research prob-
lem. In giving an exposition of the theory, one
needs to bring into the discussion the main pro-
ponents and detractors / critics of the theory in
order to offer a balanced argument. However, it
helps when a researcher successfully demon-
strates that despite criticisms of the theory, it is
nonetheless supported by other experts in the
field, particularly with regard to research prob-
lems of the class of the one the researcher is
pursuing.
Figure 4 illustrates the interplay among the
three sets of dimensions of (a) deductive versus
inductive reasoning, (b) conceptual versus
9. THEORETICAL VERSUS CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS 193
theoretical frameworks, relative to (c) qualita-
tive and quantitative research paradigms.
Thus, in deductive research, researchers
normally use a dominant theory to address a
given research problem, while in inductive re-
search, many aspects of different theoretical
perspectives are brought together to build up a
generalisation with enough “power” to guide
the study(Liehr and Smith 1999: 13). Thus, in-
duction “moves from the particular to the gener-
al, from a set of specific observations to the dis-
covery of a pattern that represents some degree
of order among all the given events … In induc-
tive reasoning people use specific instances or
occurrences to draw conclusions about entire
classes of objects or events” (de Vos et al. 2005:
47).
Accordingly, in inductive reasoning, the re-
search framework (that is, conceptual framework)
emerges as the researcher identifies and pieces
together the relevant concepts from both theo-
retical perspectives and empirical findings on
the topic with, so to speak, “an open mind”.
Accordingly, the inductive approach to litera-
ture review involves the reading of many indi-
vidual theoretical perspectives and reports. From
these readings, one identifies a basket of salient
concepts and principles which one can reason-
ably use to address the research problem. As
such, a conceptual framework is synthesised
from a number of concepts, research findings
and theoretical perspectives – some of which
may be in opposition or competition with one
another. The reason for this is that, typically, in
Table 1: A summary of the conceptual differences between conceptual and theoretical trameworks
Variable Conceptual framework Theoretical framework
Genesis (a) Created by the researcher from a variety Evolves, or ‘takes shape’, from reviewed
of conceptual or theoretical perspectives;(b) literature and/or the data collected.
Adopted / adapted from a pre-existing theory
or theoretical perspective.
Purpose (a) Helps the researcher see clearly the (a) Helps the researcher see clearly the main
main variables and concepts in a given variables and concepts in a given study;
study;
(b) Provides the researcher with a (b) Provides the researcher with a general
general approach (methodology – research pproach (methodology – research design,
design, target population and research a target population and research sample,
sample, data collection & analysis); data collection & analysis); and
(c) Guides the researcher in the collection, (c) Guides the researcher in the collection,
interpretation and explanation of the data, interpretation and explanation of the data.
where no dominant theoretical
perspective exists
(d) Guides future research – specifically
where the conceptual framework integrates
literature review and field data.
Conceptual Synthesis of relevant concepts. Application of a theory as a whole
Meaning or in part.
Process Underlying (a) Mainly inductive, as in social sciences Mainly deductive, as in the natural sciences
Review of where research problems cannot ordinarily where hypothesis testing takes place to
Literature be explained by one theoretical perspective; verify the ‘power’ of a theory.
(b) Some social science research also gets
driven by theories, but theories in the social
sciences tend not to have the same ‘power’
as those in the natural sciences.
Methodological (a)May be located in both quantitative and (a) Located mainly in the quantitative
Approach qualitative research paradigms; increasingly, research paradigm;
mixed-methods approaches are recommended;
(b) Data mostly collected through both (b) Data collected mainly through
empirical and descriptive survey instruments, experimental designs, empirical surveys
interviews and direct observations – hence, and tests;
a preponderance of qualitative data; (c) Efforts made to standardize context, or
(c) Strong on consideration of context. else ignore it.
Scope of Limited to specific research problem and Wider application beyond the current
Application or context. research problem and context.
10. 194 SITWALA IMENDA
most social science research – in contrast to
research in the natural sciences, there is no one
theorythat can adequatelydirect the researcher
to sufficiently answer the research questions
being pursued.
The above points are aptly summarised by
Borgatti (1999: 1) in his statement that “theoret-
ical frameworks are obviouslycritical in deduc-
tive, theory-testing sorts of studies”. Hence, in
trying to distinguish between theoretical and
conceptual frameworks one maysay that, where-
as research based on deductive reasoning makes
use of a pre-existing theory, or theoretical frame-
work, research based of inductive reasoning
tends to be ‘theory-building’.
SCOPE OFAPPLICATION
Both ‘conceptual’ and ‘theoretical’ frame-
works refer to the epistemological paradigm a
researcher uses to look at a given research prob-
lem. However, the scope of conceptual frame-
works is usually applicable only to the specific
research problem for which it was created. Ap-
plication to other research problems may be lim-
ited. Since theoretical frameworks refer to the
application of theories, theytend tohave a much
wider scope of use beyond one research prob-
lem.
Table 1 summarises the points made in this
paper. According toTable 1, the differences be-
tween theoretical and conceptual frameworks lie
in their genesis, conceptual meanings, howthey
each relate to the process of literature review,
the methodological approaches they evoke and
their scope of application. Once a conceptual
framework has been established, the purpose is
largelysimilar tothat ofa theoretical framework.
However, where a conceptual framework ‘shapes
up’ from a synthesis of existing literature and
freshly collected data, such a conceptual frame-
work tends to serve as a springboard for further
research. Cumulativelyand over a period oftime,
the findings of these researches may lead to an
articulation of a theory – from which a theoreti-
cal framework may, thus, evolve.
CONCLUSION
This paper has argued that, within the con-
text of research, both conceptual and theoreti-
cal frameworks serve the same purposes, name-
ly: (a) to help the researcher see clearlythe main
variables and concepts in a given study, (b) to
provide the researcher with a general approach
(methodology– research design, target popula-
tion and research sample, data collection and
analysis), and (c) to guide the researcher in data
collection, interpretation and explanation. In
essence, a researcher’s conceptual or theoreti-
cal framework guides what the person ‘notices’
during the course of data collection or as an
event takes place; it is also responsible for what
the person ‘does not notice’ – suggesting that
people may not notice or observe things which
fall outside their conceptual / theoretical frame-
works.Thus, in as much as one’s theoretical / con-
ceptual framework serves as spectacles through
which tosee the world, at the same time, it places
boundaries on one’s vision and horizons.
A further point is that although both con-
ceptual and theoretical frameworks serve the
purposes as specified above, there are differ-
ences between them, conceptually, methodolog-
icallyand with regard to the scope of their appli-
cation.
REFERENCES
Borgatti SP 1999. Elements of Research. From< http:/
/www.analytictech.com/mb313/elements.htm.> (Re-
trieved on August 17, 2010).
Chinn PL, Kramer MK 1999. Theory and Nursing: A
Systematic Approach. 5th
Edition. St Louis, USA:
Mosby.
Cline D 2002. Logical Structure, Theoretical Frame-
work. EducationLeadership Center for Excellence.
From <Http://Education.Astate.Edu.> (Retrieved
on 18 October 2011).
Coetzee A 2009. Overcoming Alternative Conceptions
Concerning Interference and Diffraction of Waves.
DEd Thesis. Pretoria: Tshwane University of Tech-
nology.
Denzin NK 1978. The Research Act: A Theoretical
Introduction to Sociological Methods. New York:
Praeger.
Dzurec LC, Abraham JL 1993. The nature of inquiry:
Linking quantitative and qualitative research. Ad-
vances in Nursing Science, 16: 73-79.
Fox W, Bayat MS 2007. A Guide to Managing Re-
search. Cape Town: JUTA and Co Ltd. Shredding.
Guba EG, Lincoln YS 2005. Paradigmatic controver-
sies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In:
NK Denzin, YS Lincoln (Eds.): The Sage Hand-
book of Qualitative Research. 3rd
Edition. Thou-
sand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 191-215.
Hawking S 1988. A Brief History of Time: The Updated
and Expanded Tenth Anniversary Edition. New York:
Bantam Press.
Johnson RB, Onwuegbuzie AJ 2004. Mixed methods
research: A research paradigm whose time has come.
Educational Researcher, 33(7): 14-26.
11. THEORETICAL VERSUS CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS 195
Johnson RB, Onwuegbuzie AJ, Turner LA 2007. To-
ward a definition of mixed methods research. Jour-
nal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2): 112-133.
Liehr P, Smith MJ 1999. Middle range theory: Spin-
ning research and practice to create knowledge for
the new millennium. Advances in Nursing Science,
21(4): 81-91.
Schwandt TA 2000. Three epistemological stances for
qualitative inquiry. In: NK Denzin, YS Lincoln (Eds.):
Handbook of Qualitative Research. 2nd
Edition.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 189-213.
Smith MJ 2008. Disciplinary perspectives linked to
middle range theory. In: MJ Smith, PR Liehr (Eds.):
Middle Range Theory for Nursing. 2nd
Edition, New
York: Springer Publishing Company, pp. 3-14.
Smith MJ, Liehr P 1999. Attentively embracing story:
A middle-range theory with practice and research
implications. Research and Theory for Nursing Prac-
tice, 13(3): 187-204.
Strauss A, Corbin J 1998. Basics of Qualitative Re-
search: Techniques and Procedures for Developing
Grounded Theory. 2nd
Edition. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Wacker JG 1998. A definition of theory: Research
guidelines for different theory-building research
methods in operations management. Journal of
Operations Management, 16: 361-385.
Weisenmiller M 2008. Florida Considers Laws Support-
ing “Intelligent Design”. Teaching, Monitor, Issue
169, August7. From <http://www. albionmonitor. com/
0805a/copyright/floridaintelligentdesign. html.>