Research Methods Critical Review

Research
methods a critical review
1
Aims
To re-cap on learning to date
To explore in a little more depth some examples of methods
To review grounded theory
To explore ethnography
In-put around 3 actual research projects (PhD study)
So far….
We are aware that there are different research methodologies
which lead to the use of different methods
There is a fundamental split based upon structure
determining whether a qualitative or quantitative approach is
taken
This is influenced by researcher preferences and the area to be
followed
Which methods is best?
Opinion is divided and this means there is no simple answer
Debate about which approach is superior ends in personal

preference and that all methods have their own strengths
Yet there is a critical review of both methods and methodology
Important to engage with to understand bias and limitation
Method 1: Surveys
What? Gathers information / opinions / can describe a trend
Can be structured / semi-structured / sample or whole
population
Usefulness / strengths: Provides a quantitative or numeric
description of events
Limitations: Closed and encoded / lacks flexibility/ restricted
information / researcher and tool are in control
Method 2: Interviews
What? ‘Conversation with a purpose’ / two way approach /
Unstructured / semi-structured
Usefulness / strengths: Findings are created and recorded at the
time / flexibility / allows for a reflexive approach
Limitations: Requires a skilled interviewer / side-lining can be
a problem / personal disclosure / ethically challenging
Methods 3: Focus group
What? A group interview or discussion (Gill et al., 2008). Based
upon interaction to create findings.
Usefulness / strengths: Less time required and rich qualitative
data created / findings are co-constructed / potential for
egalitarianism
Limitations: Requires careful facilitation / some participant may

dominate / ethics / sensitivity need to be adhered to
E.G. Grounded Theory (GT)
A qualitative strategy were theory is derived from participants
feedback (understand humans)
Data collection and analysis occur simultaneously
Social processes are discovered building ideas / theory from the
ground up / avoiding pre-conceptions
Categories and analytic codes developed from data
Theoretical sampling used to refine categories
Analytical memos used between coding
and writing
Categories integrated into a theoretical
framework
Defining and evaluating…
“The spirit of grounded theory is open-ended and flexible, a
form of research that seeks to understand individuals involved
in social interactions of various types within various contexts”
Gilgun (2010)
GT provides tools, which are flexible, reflexive and allowing
‘fresh ways’ to examine data
“ We begin by being open to what is happening in the studies
scenes and interview statements so that we might learn about
out research participants’ lives” Charmaz (2006)
Ethos / Guides for GT
Charmaz comments on the importance of preservation of
‘human dignity for participants’, she says that this might be
accomplished through building rapport with them

“If researchers do not establish rapport, they risk losing access
to conduct subsequent interviews or observations”
(Charmaz:2006: 19)
Glaser (1998) ‘cautions against preconceived interview guides’,
whereas Charmaz advocates for the usefulness of ‘an open-
ended interview guide’ to keep track of ideas and help
engagement, by reducing distractions
E.G. Ethnography
Qualitative strategy in which the researcher studies an intact
cultural / social group in their natural setting
Takes a longer time, as ethnographers spent a minimum of one
year living amongst the group so local people to have a chance
to know the ethnographer, and build rapport / understanding
with local people
Methodological approach
Relies on participant observation as its key data collection
method
Ethnographer becomes completely immersed in another culture
and way of life / not only observing the phenomenon under
study, but becoming part of the participant’s daily life
Aiming to understand practices within the setting, making sense
in the context of day-to-day life
For example, an ethnographer studying the religious practices
of a culture would not only attend religious services but
participate to
gain true understand from an insider’s view
Examples of conducting research

1: Jo Smith
Choice of topic: Work-Life balance and Well-being
Choice of methods: Qualitative / Social Constructionism /
feminism
choice of participants: Women learners
Choice of methods: Semi-structured interviews and focus
groups
The outcomes: Rich qualitative findings
E.G. Limitations
Personal and professional dilemma: “Many benefits are derived
from an insider researcher perspective, including familiarity
with the research setting, yet barriers can include assumptions
made by researchers and limited confidence amongst
participants related to the confidentiality of their disclosures
(Hanson, 2013; Humphrey, 2012; Mercer, 2007)”
Limitation: Positional power
‘Positional power within this study may have influenced
commentary, with the interaction between the women who were
students and me as a lecturer/researcher creating a restriction in
respondent candor’
Mason (1996) and Letherby, (2003) argue that positional power
can reduce interaction and inhibit participants
‘In drawing upon feminist approaches and technics, including
disclosing personal information to build rapport and spending
more time listening than talking, I tried to reduce the impact of
the power imbalance’

Small scale research
“…the small scale nature of the study… the study was based
upon a small group of students (ten) and if more students had
been interviewed at the time greater variation in findings might
have been found”
“This approach reflects a particular set of circumstances, at a
certain time and the focus group was used as a confirmation tool
(Simmons et al., 2015)”
Writing up tension…
Tension and potential limitations during the writing up process
occur, as the findings are formed into a thesis, available in the
public domain, in this case a PhD thesis
The voice was important throughout my research and I was
committed to this. However, O’Reiley and Kiyimba (2015: 158)
argue that the ‘tidying up’ process, whereby findings are
prepared to be presented to others involves choices and is
selective, returning power to the researcher
Researcher experiences
Mark Durkin
Kevin Burke

Research
methods a critical review
1
Aims
To re-cap on learning to date
To explore in a little more depth some examples of methods
To review grounded theory
To explore ethnography
In-put around 3 actual research projects (PhD study)
So far….
We are aware that there are different research methodologies
which lead to the use of different methods
There is a fundamental split based upon structure
determining whether a qualitative or quantitative approach is
taken
This is influenced by researcher preferences and the area to be
followed
Which methods is best?
Opinion is divided and this means there is no simple answer
Debate about which approach is superior ends in personal
preference and that all methods have their own strengths
Yet there is a critical review of both methods and methodology
Important to engage with to understand bias and limitation

Method 1: Surveys
What? Gathers information / opinions / can describe a trend
Can be structured / semi-structured / sample or whole
population
Usefulness / strengths: Provides a quantitative or numeric
description of events
Limitations: Closed and encoded / lacks flexibility/ restricted
information / researcher and tool are in control
Method 2: Interviews
What? ‘Conversation with a purpose’ / two way approach /
Unstructured / semi-structured
Usefulness / strengths: Findings are created and recorded at the
time / flexibility / allows for a reflexive approach
Limitations: Requires a skilled interviewer / side-lining can be
a problem / personal disclosure / ethically challenging
Methods 3: Focus group
What? A group interview or discussion (Gill et al., 2008). Based
upon interaction to create findings.
Usefulness / strengths: Less time required and rich qualitative
data created / findings are co-constructed / potential for
egalitarianism
Limitations: Requires careful facilitation / some participant may
dominate / ethics / sensitivity need to be adhered to

E.G. Grounded Theory (GT)
A qualitative strategy were theory is derived from participants
feedback (understand humans)
Data collection and analysis occur simultaneously
Social processes are discovered building ideas / theory from the
ground up / avoiding pre-conceptions
Categories and analytic codes developed from data
Theoretical sampling used to refine categories
Analytical memos used between coding
and writing
Categories integrated into a theoretical
framework
Defining and evaluating…
“The spirit of grounded theory is open-ended and flexible, a
form of research that seeks to understand individuals involved
in social interactions of various types within various contexts”
Gilgun (2010)
GT provides tools, which are flexible, reflexive and allowing
‘fresh ways’ to examine data
“ We begin by being open to what is happening in the studies
scenes and interview statements so that we might learn about
out research participants’ lives” Charmaz (2006)
Ethos / Guides for GT
Charmaz comments on the importance of preservation of
‘human dignity for participants’, she says that this might be
accomplished through building rapport with them
“If researchers do not establish rapport, they risk losing access
to conduct subsequent interviews or observations”
(Charmaz:2006: 19)

Glaser (1998) ‘cautions against preconceived interview guides’,
whereas Charmaz advocates for the usefulness of ‘an open-
ended interview guide’ to keep track of ideas and help
engagement, by reducing distractions
E.G. Ethnography
Qualitative strategy in which the researcher studies an intact
cultural / social group in their natural setting
Takes a longer time, as ethnographers spent a minimum of one
year living amongst the group so local people to have a chance
to know the ethnographer, and build rapport / understanding
with local people
Methodological approach
Relies on participant observation as its key data collection
method
Ethnographer becomes completely immersed in another culture
and way of life / not only observing the phenomenon under
study, but becoming part of the participant’s daily life
Aiming to understand practices within the setting, making sense
in the context of day-to-day life
For example, an ethnographer studying the religious practices
of a culture would not only attend religious services but
participate to
gain true understand from an insider’s view
Examples of conducting research
1: Jo Smith
Choice of topic: Work-Life balance and Well-being
Choice of methods: Qualitative / Social Constructionism /

feminism
choice of participants: Women learners
Choice of methods: Semi-structured interviews and focus
groups
The outcomes: Rich qualitative findings
E.G. Limitations
Personal and professional dilemma: “Many benefits are derived
from an insider researcher perspective, including familiarity
with the research setting, yet barriers can include assumptions
made by researchers and limited confidence amongst
participants related to the confidentiality of their disclosures
(Hanson, 2013; Humphrey, 2012; Mercer, 2007)”
Limitation: Positional power
‘Positional power within this study may have influenced
commentary, with the interaction between the women who were
students and me as a lecturer/researcher creating a restriction in
respondent candor’
Mason (1996) and Letherby, (2003) argue that positional power
can reduce interaction and inhibit participants
‘In drawing upon feminist approaches and technics, including
disclosing personal information to build rapport and spending
more time listening than talking, I tried to reduce the impact of
the power imbalance’
Small scale research

“…the small scale nature of the study… the study was based
upon a small group of students (ten) and if more students had
been interviewed at the time greater variation in findings might
have been found”
“This approach reflects a particular set of circumstances, at a
certain time and the focus group was used as a confirmation tool
(Simmons et al., 2015)”
Writing up tension…
Tension and potential limitations during the writing up process
occur, as the findings are formed into a thesis, available in the
public domain, in this case a PhD thesis
The voice was important throughout my research and I was
committed to this. However, O’Reiley and Kiyimba (2015: 158)
argue that the ‘tidying up’ process, whereby findings are
prepared to be presented to others involves choices and is
selective, returning power to the researcher
Researcher experiences
Mark Durkin
Kevin Burke
Ontological & Epistemological approach
Jo Smith

Aims:
To explore ‘Ontological’ approach and stance
With consideration of examples
To Consider and explain ‘Epistemology’
Linking with approaches, findings and bias
Finally looking at positivist and anti-positivist approaches
Epistemology:
“Epistemology refers to a theory or philosophy about the nature
of knowledge and the stance we take on how we come to know
what we know about the world” (Saks and Allsop)
A branch of philosophy considering:
‘What constitutes and does not constitute knowledge?’
Understanding Epistemology:
Considering the levels of reality and where knowledge comes
from in the world
Asking questions about how researchers know what they know
Considers the impact the researchers expectations can influence
research outcome
Influenced by positivism and realism (Social Constructionism)
Mixed Methods can take from different ideas, but still need to
understand decision making and the knowledge base
Paradigms
Paradigm is a framework which comes from a set of beliefs

A paradigm is influenced by the belief or opinion related to:
What should be studies
What method should be used
How data should be interpreted
There is much influence from the positivist or realist stances
Many researchers within qualitative approach will work with
‘subtle realism’ as research reports cannot encapsulate single
truth but a representation of social reality
Social Constructionism
In the research environment
Research can only capture a moment in time
This means that in terms of the epistemology the context is
important
A researcher must consider the context around the research,
which will help with the consideration of the interpretation of
the data
Realist Epistemology
To consider both what is factually accurate
Also looking at ways in which bias comes into the research
Research should consider how personal and epistemological
approach can influence reality
Consider how research can be influenced by the experience and
even mood of participants
Postpositivist worldview: Thinking after positivism /
challenging absolute truth of
knowledgePostpositivismConstructionismDetermination
Reductionism
Empirical observation and measurement

Theory verificationUnderstanding
Multiple participant meanings
Social and historical construction
Theory generationAdvocacy / ParticipatoryPragmatismPolitical
Empowerment issues-orientated
Collaborative
Change-orientatedConsequence of actions
Problem-centred
Pluralistic
Real-world and practice orientated
Cresswell (2009)
Ontology / Ontological position
Nature of reality / existence / What is real?
“Ontology is the study of being, that is, the nature of existence
and what constitutes reality. So, for example, for positivists the
world is independent of our knowledge of it – it exists ‘out
there’ while for relativists and others, there are multiple
realities and ways of accessing them” (Gray, 2015)
“Western thought remains divided by two opposing ontological
traditions. Heraclitus (c.535–c.475bc)….placed an emphasis on
a changing and emergent world (BECOMING). Parmenides
(c.515–c.445bc), who succeeded him, placed quite a different
emphasis on a permanent and unchanging reality (BEING) ”
(Gray, 2015)
Ontological Approach
Ontology relates to the stance / Belief of the researcher
It is influenced by the ideology of the researcher
Ontological approach usually refers to the way in which

experience and culture influence researchers and their research
Ontology can be linked to ways of seeing power and trying to
empower those involved
Political approach and belief, e.g. To create changes in social
justice / based upon gender
Ontology?
Feminist Ontology:
Based upon gender
Feminist questions western knowledge base upon patriarchy
Ontology of a minority:
Ontology could be around the experiences of a minority group:
E.G. around ethnicity / mental health / disability
Ontology Approach:
Questions assumptions around knowledge
Social Construction of knowledge is examined
In terms of thinking about ways in which we make sense of the
world
In Pairs:
Consider factors which influence the opinions of respondents
Positivist Ontology (Quantitative)
Realism

“The ‘Truth’ is objective, static and measurable
Context-free generalizations
Cause and effect laws.
Research that converges on ‘the truth’
Reductionist and deterministic approaches
Positivism
Epistemology. Dualist and objective.
Methodology. Experimental

Ontology. Realism: One reality exists that can be found
Constructivism or Relativism (Qualitative)
Relativism
Searching for meaning rather than truth
‘Truths’ are subjective, dynamic and contextual
Multiple truths that may conflict but are still true.
Perceptions or truths that may change with time

Constructivism
Epistemology. Interactive/ transactional and subjective
Methodology. Qualitative, interpretative
Ontology. Relativism. Realities are co-constructed
Summary of positivist and phenomenological paradigms
Positivist paradigm
Phenomenological paradigm
Basic beliefs
The world is external and objective.
The observer is independent.

Science is value-free. The world is socially constructed and
subjective.
The observer is a party to what is being observed.
Science is driven by human interests. The researcher should
Focus on facts
Locate causality between variables
Formulate and test hypotheses (deductive approach) Focus on
meanings
Try to understand what is happening
Construct theories and models from the data (inductive
approach) Methods include
Operationalizing concepts so that they can be measured
Using large samples from which to generalize to the population
Quantitative methods
Using multiple methods to establish different views of a
phenomenon
Using small samples researched in depth or over time
Qualitative methods
Adapted from Easterby-Smith et al., 2002
In Summary…….
Epistemology and Ontology are important in terms of the
approach the researcher takes
Epistemology is related to knowledge creation and takes ideas
from philosophy

Ontology is the ‘stance’ influenced by your own experiences
and the subject under discussion
Ontology will be influenced by positivist or anti-positivist
Research Ethics
Aims
To consider ethics and ways in which they have been developed
To provide some definitions
Consider the importance of ethics in terms of human services
To look at the importance of protection and the law
Consider ways in which organisations have developed ethics
Look at examples of ethical guidance
Why research ethics are important?
Ethics must be considered so that research is not a negative
experience
The researcher must take responsibility for the experiences of
participants
Participants must always know what their rights are / with
emphasis upon the right to withdraw / not answer the question
The researcher should share this with the participants
Consider :What is "good” or "bad"
What is "acceptable" "worthwhile", "beneficial",
Or what might turn out to be "harmful"
and should be avoided

Defining Research Ethics
Ethics: ‘ The study of standards of conduct and values, and in
research, how these impact on both the researcher and research
subject’ (Gray, 2016)
Ethical Principles: ‘…refers to the moral norms that are basic
for biomedical ethics. Ethics is a generic term for the various
ways of understanding and examining moral life’
(Moule and Goodman 2009)
Development of Ethics
Early ethical discussion and the theory is embedded in
philosophy
In this way it is fundamentally linked with what is considered
right and wrong
Historically the development of ethical codes was influenced by
the scandal of Nazi experiments during the second world war
(Nuremberg code)
Ethics have been heavily influenced by research into health and
medicine
From this University ethics committee has developed (O’Reilly
and Kiyimba, 2015)
Ethics within human services
There are times when those who use services might be
considered more vulnerable which means further attention to
rights is needed

Consequently ethics must give full and clear consideration of
the rights of individuals
The relationship between researchers and participants needs to
be considered (insider)
Also the focus must be on the benefit of intervention and the
well-being of the participant over any other area of discussion
(O’Reilly
and Kiyimba, 2015)
Guidance & Standards
Written standards are set to help ensure best practice
“During the identification of the research problem it is
important to identify a problem that will benefit individuals
being studied” (Creswell, 2009)
Codes of ethics and guidance are to protect both researchers and
participants and as such a researching organizations
responsibility
No researcher has any right to demand access to information
Research can be intrusive so in is important to know where the
boundaries are
Appreciation of Participants
The research process has the potential to empower participants /
through giving a voice
Researcher have a responsibility to appreciate the participant:
Valuing the time given by an organization or a participant as
they agree to be involved in your research is important
This means that part of the practice should be to offer clarity
about expectations and time commitment from the start
This should include: Guidance about the process and

involvement / the time it will take
Permission must be obtained at a very early stage and the right
to withdraw should be clearly stated
There should be a very clear outline of how the information will
be used and presented
When Participants right are not given consideration…
They will feel undervalued and out of control which is
disempowering and unethically
How a participant feels reflects the potential to cause harm
Ethical considerations are extremely important where vulnerable
groups are concerned
There must be consideration of what people are able to grasp /
their understanding (informed consent)
The health & well-being of the person is always central which
means there must be a careful person centered assessment
throughout
Key Criteria to show ethical approach
Protection of rights: privacy & confidentiality should be
maintained
Protection from harm
Positive contribution: In terms of knowledge & understanding.
Honesty & Integrity: To be truthful in method & behaviour
Ethical Codes and Guidance
Researching organisations are responsible for ensuring
adherence to ethics

Any research undertaken in the name of an organisation must
follow codes and guidance provided
These are reflective of good practice and a moral obligation
They must also be used in conjunction with the law / to uphold
the rights of individuals
E.G Ethical Codes:
British Sociological Association (March 2002).
https://www.britsoc.co.uk/media/23902/statementofethicalpracti
ce.pdf
British Psychological Association
https://www.bps.org.uk/news-and-policy/bps-code-ethics-and-
conduct
Data Protection Act 1998 and the General Data Protection
Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2016/679) (GDPR)
Aware of the risks to anonymity, privacy and confidentiality
All kinds of personal information storage and processing,
including computer and paper files, e-mail records, audio and
videotapes
Aware of the kinds of personal information that will be
collected / what will be done with it, and to whom it will be
disclosed
‘Consent to process' may need to be obtained throughout
(Checking)
Measures to prevent accidental breaches of confidentiality
should be taken
In cases where confidentiality is threatened, relevant records
should be destroyed
Provisions for data security at the end of a project must be
made. Where the researcher leaves the University, this
responsibility should usually rest with the relevant Department

https://www.gov.uk/data-protection
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guide-to-the-
general-data-protection-regulation
Informed consent
A researcher must be able to show that participants have given
consent
Informed consent depends upon the ability of the individual to
give consent and as such linked with mental capacity
If a person is vulnerable this might mean that there is advice
from those who know the person
The participant should be aware of the aim of the research and
any risks which may be involved. This is not just related to
physical risk but psychological and emotional
A short statement showing what the research is about should be
given or read to the participant
Problems with Informed Consent and process consent as an
option
There are times when obtaining informed consent is difficult.
For example, from adults with learning disabilities, or a person
who is seen to not have mental capacity.
There will be times when people want to be involved and gain a
voice through research
NHS has very strict restrictions around research ethics
Additional protocols including evidence of de-briefing would be
required
Process consent places responsibility to ensure the participant is
comfortable throughout the process and is based on the
participant being able to withdraw from the research at any time

Further Issues
Participants should be provided with a detailed overview of
their involvement and expectations
Assurance that privacy and confidentiality will be maintained
should be given
This would mean that alternative names should be used to
protect identity
Information should also be treated in a respectful manner
Covert studies cause additional pressures as this cannot be
checked with participants and is increasingly rare
University of Bolton Research Ethics
Each University has an obligation to ensure that any research
uses clear guide lines
The guidance is based upon ethical principles and aimed at
supporting the researcher and the individuals
The process must be followed:
The initial ethics should be discussed with the tutor /
supervisor
The RE1 form should be completed, if supporting materials are
to be used these should be included (E.G. Survey Questions)
If it relates to an area of practice managers letters should be
shown
The form must be signed by the student / tutor or supervisor and
then a member of the ethics committee
https://www.bolton.ac.uk/study/research/research-policies-
documents/research-ethics-framework/

Understanding research paradigms.pdf
21JARNA Volume 21 Number 3 December 2018
Understanding research paradigms
Clare Davies* RN, RSCN, MPhil (Nursing), BSc (Hons)
Community Health, Grad Cert Child and Adolescent
Mental Health
Lecturer in Nursing, Susan Wakil School of Nursing and
Midwifery, University of Sydney
Email [email protected]
Murray Fisher RN, PhD, DipAppSc (Nursing), BHSc (Nursing),
MHPEd, ITU Cert
Associate Professor, Susan Wakil School of Nursing and
Nursing Scholar in Residence, Royal Rehab
*Corresponding author
Research in brief
Keywords: Research, methodology, paradigms.
Introduction
In order to better understand research methodology, nurses need
an understanding of research paradigms. Paradigms can be
described as different ways of viewing the world and often form

the foundation from which research is undertaken. They consist
of a set of assumptions about what is reality, how knowledge
is created and what is valuable to learn. It is important that
researchers are clear about their own beliefs and assumptions
in this regard. In understanding paradigms and their impact
upon the research process, nurses will be better positioned
to understand the nature of research questions, why particular
methodologies are used to answer those questions and how
data collected is analysed and interpreted (Weaver & Olson,
2006). Consequently, this will assist nurses in developing a
clearer understanding of how to critique research, how research
results can be translated to their clinical practice and,
ultimately,
how to undertake research themselves (Scotland, 2012).
What is a research paradigm?
Put simply, a paradigm is a world view, or a belief system. It is
the lens through which we see the world around us. In research,
the paradigm governs how we ask research questions and
conduct the research. A research paradigm consists of several

components: the nature of reality or truth (ontology) which
asks the question “What is reality?”; the nature of knowledge
(epistemology) “What does it mean to know?” ; the nature of
values (axiology) “What is valuable to know?”, and; the
strategy
used (methodology) “How do we find out?”. (Creswell, 2014).
Table 1 provides a comparison of the major paradigms for each
of these components.
It is important to note that there is often overlap between
paradigms and they are not always exclusive of one another.
This
can cause confusion for the novice researcher, as often
paradigm
arguments in the literature can seem contradictory and may
differ from publication to publication. However, they are often
a
starting point for a researcher, allowing them to conceptualise
and articulate the research approach and provide them with a
foundation to work from when designing their study.
What are the major paradigms in scientific

inquiry?
There are a number of research paradigms, and numerous
sources in the literature that explain and define them (Atkinson
& Delamont, 2011; Creswell, 2014; Denzin & Lincoln, 2018;
Vogt, 2011). Here, we provide you with an overview of the
major paradigms in scientific inquiry: positivist, post-positivist,
interpretive, critical and pragmatic.
The scientific paradigm/positivism
The scientific paradigm developed from the period in history
known as the Enlightenment. This was the 18th century
intellectual movement that challenged traditional religious
views
and emphasised knowledge and reasoning (Scotland, 2012).
Positivism is based on the assumption that there is one, single
reality (ontology) and that in order to know this single reality,
the study of a phenomenon must be undertaken with objectivity
and detached impartiality (epistemology). In order to discover
this single reality in an objective way, positivist methodology
is experimental in nature, tests predetermined hypotheses

or theories and usually uses rigorous, quantitative research
methods with large sample sizes (Oliver, 2010). The positivist
22 Volume 21 Number 3 December 2018 JARNA
researcher is detached from the research participant in order
to eliminate bias and is often blinded to specific conditions of
the research study. The objective of positivist research is to
produce data that is predictive, generalisable to a population or
situation and relies upon the concept of probability (the measure
of likelihood of something occurring) (Dorey, 2010). It employs
deductive reasoning, a thought process whereby hypotheses are
predetermined and general (what is already known), that is then
applied to what is being tested (Schneider, Haber, LoBiondo-
Wood & Whitehead, 2013). When reported, positivist research
will usually reduce data to numerical indices. A research study
that
comes from a positivist perspective will often use experimental
methodologies and data collection methods. Positivism is

criticised by some for not taking into account individuality or
the
subjectivity of human experiences (Schneider et al., 2013).
An example of research from the positivist paradigm is the
work conducted by McKechnie et al. (2016a, 2016b, 2018)
who undertook a series of quantitative studies to identify
the characteristics that could be used to predict falls in the
inpatient traumatic brain injury rehabilitation population. Using
a convenience sample of consecutively admitted patients
(N=140) in three metropolitan inpatient brain injury
rehabilitation
units, McKechnie et al. (2018) found that a model including
five
weighted predictors provided the best predictive validity of
fallers
in this population. The resultant tool had better predictive
validity
than the Ontario Modified STRATIFY falls risk screening tool.
Post-positivism
Post-positivism was developed as an approach to research

that recognised that human behaviour is complex and that the
positivist objective of unbiased, objective reporting of research
was not always possible (Clark, 1998). Post-positivist research
is based on a critical realist ontology, the belief that there is a
single reality but we cannot know it for sure, and a modified
objectivist epistemology, meaning that pure objectivity is
impossible (Sharma, 2010).
Post-positivist research uses a triangulation of approaches to
research, as it is grounded in the belief that there is no perfect
way of determining the truth, and that using different
approaches
allows the weakness of one approach to be offset by the strength
of another. Triangulation can occur within methodologies,
methods and data analysis (Oliver, 2010).
Characteristics Positivist Post-positivist Interpretive Critical
Pragmatic
Other names Scientific Naturalistic,
constructivist
Emancipatory
Aim Production

of predictive,
generalisable data
Uncover meaning of
reality as understood
by individuals or
groups
Description, exploration
and understanding of
experience
Raise awareness and
elicit social change
Solving “real world”
problems
Ontology Single reality; real
world driven by natural
causes
Critical realism Multiple subjective
realities mentally
constructed by
individuals
Historical realism Single and multiple
realities
Epistemology Researcher objectivity
and detached
impartiality; control
Modified objectivity Researcher entwined
in production of

knowledge; dialectical
Knowledge is socially
constructed
None
Research methods Quantitative Qualitative and
quantitative —
triangulation
Qualitative Qualitative Quantitative and
qualitative
Common designs/
methodologies
Descriptive, cohort,
cross-sectional, case
control, experimental,
randomised control
trials
Modified experimental,
critical multiplism
Phenomenology,
grounded theory,
ethnography, narrative,
biographical
Neo-Marxist, Feminist
Research, Queer
Theory, Participatory
Action Research

Mixed methods
research
Criticisms Does not take into
account individual
experiences
Does not always
produce well defined
answers
Limited transferability
and generalisability
Does not always
guarantee its aims of
emancipation
Flexibility in approach
can lead to confusion
Table 1: A summary of the characteristics of each of the major
paradigms
Adapted from (Denzin & Lincoln, 2018)
Post-positivist research often uses both qualitative and
quantitative methods but is criticised for not always producing
well-defined answers to research questions (Sharma, 2010)

Interpretive paradigm
An interpretive paradigm (also referred to a naturalistic or
constructivist paradigm) takes an anti-positivist approach and is
based on a relativist ontology. Relativism views reality as being
subjective and differs from person to person (Guba & Lincoln,
1994). It does not accept the concept of a single reality and
aims to describe, explore and understand the context of
naturally
occurring events. As opposed to the positivist approach, an
interpretive approach employs inductive reasoning, where
theories are not tested, but developed from specific observations
(Schneider et al., 2013).
Interpretive research uses qualitative research methods with
small samples sizes in an attempt to collect rich, in-depth
data that describes the individual experiences of those being
studied (Schreier, 2018). Rather than trying to be impartial and
detached from the research process, qualitative researchers
recognise that they cannot be separated from the research
or the people involved. Interpretive research is dialectical; it is

through dialogue and interaction between the subject and the
researcher that findings are generated. The researcher sees
themselves as entwined in the knowledge being produced and
acknowledge their possible biases, rather than trying to
eliminate
them (Charmaz, 2014). Therefore, interpretive research is a
deeply self-reflective process for the researcher.
There are a number of methodological approaches that
are derived from the interpretive paradigm. Each of these
approaches is guided by a particular philosophical stance, for
example, phenomenology, grounded theory or ethnography.
Data
collection methods may include observation, interviews and/or
focus groups (Flick, 2018). Interpretive approaches are
criticised
by some for their limited transferability and the inability to
apply
the results to a general population. Policy makers tend to like
generalisable results and therefore can be reluctant to fund
interpretive research (Scotland, 2012).

An example of research from the interpretive paradigm is a
grounded theory study that explored “clinicians’ experiences of
implementing goal setting with community dwelling clients with
acquired brain injury, to develop a goal setting practice
framework”
(Prescott, Fleming & Doig, 2018, p. 2388). Using a Straussian
approach to grounded theory, Prescott et al. (2018) conducted
a series of semi-structured interviews, drawing on participant
experiences and opinions of goal-setting processes using
everyday practice to engage clients. All interviews were audio
recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were analysed
using open coding to extract key concepts that were further
tested in subsequent interviews. In this research all participants’
stories are different and are equally valued. The results describe
a three-phase process where clinicians actively engage clients in
goal setting. It is acknowledged that contextual factors
influence
how clients and clinicians engage in this process.
Critical paradigm

The critical paradigm aims to raise awareness and promote
social change. Its purpose is often to empower groups who are
marginalised, or to investigate inequalities or social injustices,
and is sometimes referred to as emancipatory research (Denzin,
2016). Critical research is based in the ontological position
of historical realism and the epistomological position of social
constructivism, believing knowledge to be socially and
historically
constructed (Scotland, 2012).
There are a number of critical research approaches that are
guided by different philosophical ideological positions; for
example feminist research, queer theory or participatory action
research are all emancipatory methodologies. Critical research
generally uses qualitative research methods to collect data and
will often seek participant involvement in the research process
in order to address inequalities in the researcher/participant
relationship and to empower those individuals to take action
for themselves (Given, 2008). However, changing systems

of oppression is not easy and the emancipation of research
participants cannot be guaranteed; therefore this paradigm is
often criticised for not fulfilling its intention (Scotland, 2012).
In an example of feminist research, Fish and Hatton (2017)
examined the gendered experiences of physical restraint on
locked wards for women with a mild to moderate intellectual
disability. The feminist analysis focused on the women’s
embodied experiences in the context of a power structure that
incorporates gender and disability. This study aimed to
challenge
existing power relationships in treatment, and attitudes towards
women with intellectual disabilities in order to explore new
responses to policy and practice.
Pragmatic paradigm
Pragmatism views the traditional research paradigms as being
prescriptive in their approach to undertaking research, and

believes that they constrain intellectual curiosity. It avoids
the ontological and epistemological arguments that have
led to paradigm tensions between positivist and interpretive
approaches, acknowledging that there are single and multiple
realities, while turning its attention to solving “real world”
problems rather than focusing on philosophical positioning
(Feilzer, 2010). Mixed methods research is a methodology that
is based on pragmatism and may employ both quantitative and
qualitative methods of data collection. It has grown in
popularity
in recent years as researchers try to address the failing of
other approaches and “do what works” (Morgan, 2014). Mixed
methods researchers should have skills in both quantitative and
qualitative research design. There is criticism of this paradigm
due to its flexible approach and the potential for confusion to
arise during design and interpretation of mixed methods
research
Hawkins, McGuire, Linder and Britt (2015a) undertook a mixed

methods study, used an “explanatory sequential mixed methods
study design to understand the influence of contextual factors
on community reintegration among injured, community-
dwelling
service members” (p. 528). The first phase, a quantitative study,
consisted of a sample of 51 individuals who completed an
online survey. The survey measured community reintegration
(participation), environmental factors (including attitudes and
support, services and assistance, physical and structural,
policies, and work and school), personal factors (including self-
efficacy) and background variables (including age, sex, military
background, time since injury, severity of injury, and
rehabilitation
program attended) (Hawkins, McGuire, Britt & Linder, 2015b).
Statistical procedures such as multivariate analysis of variance
(MANOVA) and discriminant analysis were used to determine
the relative contribution of contextual factors on discriminating
the cluster levels of community reintegration (Hawkins et al.,
2015b). The second phase was a qualitative study using

phenomenology and participant interviews to understand the
subjective experience of injured service members and explain
how contextual factors influence the different cluster levels of
community reintegration (Hawkins et al., 2015a). Participants
in phase two were selected based on their cluster affiliation for
level of community reintegration as identified in phase one.
Conclusion
A research paradigm is a set of assumptions about the nature
of reality and how knowledge is created. Paradigms are
influential in determining research questions, methodology,
methods and the way data is collected and analysed; there
should be demonstrated congruence between these in any
research study. This article presented a brief overview of the
major research paradigms in order to provide the reader with a
preliminary understanding of the topic. With an understanding
of the philosophical underpinning of research studies, nurses
and novice researchers are better positioned to be able to
comprehend, critically analyse and apply the research they read

to their clinical practice.
“ W i t h a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e p h i l o s o p h i
c a l u n d e r p i n n i n g
o f r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s , n u r s e s
a n d n o v i c e r e s e a r c h e r s a r e
b e t t e r p o s i t i o n e d t o b e a b l e t o
c o m p r e h e n d , c r i t i c a l l y a n a l y s e
a n d a p p l y t h e r e s e a r c h t h e y r e a d
t o t h e i r c l i n i c a l p r a c t i c e .
”
References
Atkinson, P., & Delamont, S. (2011). SAGE qualitative research
methods.
Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Charmaz, K. (2014). An Invitation to Grounded Theory. In K.
Charmaz
(Ed.), Constructing Grounded Theory (2nd edn, pp. 1–21).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Clark, A. M. (1998). The qualitative-quantitative debate:
Moving from
positivism and confrontation to post-positivism and
reconciliation.
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 27(6), 1242–1249. doi:10.1046/
j.1365-2648.1998.00651.x
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: qualitative,
quantitative, and
mixed methods approaches (4th edn). Thousand Oaks: SAGE
Publications.

Denzin, N. K. (2016). Critical Qualitative Inquiry. Qualitative
inquiry,
23(1), 8–16. doi:10.1177/1077800416681864
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). The Sage handbook of
qualitative
research (5th edn). Los Angeles: Sage.
Dorey, F. (2010). The p value: what is it and what does it tell
you?
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 468(8), 2297–
2298.
doi:10.1007/s11999-010-1402-9
Feilzer, Y. (2010). Doing mixed methods research
pragmatically:
implications for the rediscovery of pragmatism as a research
paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(1), 6–16.
doi:10.1177/1558689809349691
Fish, R., & Hatton, C. (2017). Gendered experiences of physical
restraint
on locked wards for women. Disability and Society, 32(6), 790–
809.
Flick, U. (2018). Doing qualitative data collection — charting
the routes. .
In The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection (pp. 3–
16).
London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Retrieved from
http://sk.sagepub.
com/reference/the-sage-handbook-of-qualitative-data-collection.
doi:10.4135/9781526416070

Given, L. (2008). Critical Action Research. In The SAGE
Encyclopedia
of Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, California.
Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1994). Competing paradigms in
qualitative
research. In Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105–117).
London: Sage.
Hawkins, B., McGuire, F., Linder, S., & Britt, T., (2015a)
Understanding
contextual influences of community reintegration among injured
servicemembers. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and
Development, 52(5), 527–542.
Hawkins, B., McGuire, F., Britt, T., & Linder, S., (2015b)
Identifying
Development, 52(5), 527–542.
McKechnie, D., Fisher, M. J., Pryor, J., Bonser, M., & De Jesus,
J. (2018)
Development of the Sydney Falls Risk Screening Tool (SFRST)
in brain injury rehabilitation: A multisite prospective cohort
study.
Journal of Clinical Nursing, 27 (5–6): 958–968.
McKechnie, D., Fisher, M. J., & Pryor, J. (2016a) A Case-
control study
of faller characteristics in an inpatient traumatic brain injury
rehabilitation setting. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation,
31(2):

E59–E70.
McKechnie, D., Fisher, M. J., & Pryor, J. (2016b) The
characteristics
of falls in an inpatient traumatic brain injury rehabilitation
setting.
Journal of Clinical Nursing, 25(1–2):213–222.
Morgan, D. L. (2014). Pragmatism as a Paradigm for Social
Research. Qualitative inquiry, 20(8), 1045–1053.
doi:10.1177/1077800413513733
Oliver, P. (2010). The scientific method. In Understanding the
Research
Process (pp. 67–80). London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Retrieved
from http://sk.sagepub.com/books/understanding-the-research-
process. doi:10.4135/9781446279373
Prescott, S., Fleming, J., & Doig, E., (2018) Rehabilitation goal
setting with
community dwelling adults with acquired brain injury: a
theoretical
framework derived from clinician’s reflections on practice.
Disability
and Rehabilitation, 40(20), 2388–2399.
Schneider, Z., Haber, J., LoBiondo-Wood, G., & Whitehead, D.
(2013).
Nursing and midwifery research: methods and appraisal for
evidence-based practice (4th edn). Chatswood, NSW: Mosby.
Schreier, M. (2018). Sampling and generalization. In The SAGE
Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection (pp. 88–97). London:
SAGE Publications Ltd. Retrieved from http://sk.sagepub.com/
reference/the-sage-handbook-of-qualitative-data-collection.
doi:10.4135/9781526416070

Scotland, J. (2012). Exploring the philosophical underpinnings
of
research: relating ontology and epistemology to the
methodology
and methods of the scientific, interpretive and critical research
paradigms. English Language Teaching, 5(9), 9–16.
Sharma, B. (2010). Postpositivism. In A. Mills, G. Durepos, &
E. Wiebe
(Eds), Encyclopedia of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks,
CA:
SAGE publications.
Vogt, W. P. (2011). SAGE quantitative research methods. Los
Angeles,
CA: SAGE.
Weaver, K., & Olson, J. K. (2006). Understanding paradigms
used for
nursing research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 53(4), 459–469.
doi:doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03740.x
Copyright of Journal of the Australasian Rehabilitation Nurses'
Association (JARNA) is the
property of Australasian Rehabilitation Nurses' Association
(ARNA) Inc. and its content may
not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv
without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for
individual use.

Research from a personal perspective
Aims
Consideration of ways in which research can be influenced by
personal experiences
Explore that emancipation and empowerment this makes
possible
Examine ways in which sharing can influence research
Review the areas of proposition and reflexivity
Motivation to undertake research
Personal experiences throughout life are formative in terms of
who we are
Most researchers begins with an area of interest generated from
personal and professional interest
Closeness to a community or group / experiencing an issue will
be part of the research process
It is important to be aware of personal and professional interest,
to consider the effect of connection / understanding and the
potential for bias
Insider perspective
Part of using personal experience related to be an insider
The boundaries between insider and outsider research may not
necessarily clear-cut
Some features of a researcher’s identity are innate and
unchanging, whilst other features are innate / evolving

These features influence the insider-outsider continuum
Time, place, power relationships and personalities between the
researcher and researched, and the topic under examination may
further influence the insider-outsider status (Mercer, 2007).
Being a part of a group of a community can mean language use
is accessible and there is clear relatability
This can give a confidence to the participant which is seen to be
emancipatory
Research can be a tool for empowerment ‘Giving a voice’
‘…making it possible for people to exercise power and have
more control over their lives. That means having greater voice
in institutions, agencies and situations which affect them’
(Croft and Beresford, 1993)
Emancipatory Research
Empowerment through participation
Participants can learn through research and can also feel they
can make a different
Organisations such as Mind, Age UK, Scope raise awareness
through research, influencing policy
Part of Evidence Based Practice:
‘Patient Values’
Research in health and social care to be based upon ‘inclusion’
Community, young people and Early years use accessible
approaches so they are able to include a wide range of
participants
Partnership approach adds ‘genuineness’ and ‘authenticity’
To engage those who will use the service gives an expert view

Disclosure and sharing experiences
Sharing power in the research setting can be critical to success
It is part of theoretical approaches, such as, Feminist research
which is built upon the idea of facilitation of the ‘voice’ of
participants to be heard (Letherby, 2012)
Researchers do not want to be part of the oppression and seek to
make participants feel comfortable and valued
Seeing the ‘whole person’ not just as ‘data’
Sharing experiences / disclosure by researchers are seen to be
important to create more equal and open dialogue
E.G. Oakley (1975) disclosed her own maternity experience
when interviewing women
Positionality
Positionality is awareness of personal experiences upon the
researcher
Might also be referred to as stance / where you stand in relation
to others about you
Positionality is influenced the political and socio-economic
factors
To understand the researcher must consider their own origins
and self
Research identity affects interaction with
participants and so data collection
Researcher identity
Researcher identity is important in terms of understanding your
interest

Understanding how you relate to others
Factors which will influence you will include personal and
professional
Features of race, culture, beliefs and education will influence
identity and as such perception and ways of viewing others
There will be emotion connected to identity and researchers
should be aware of how they bring this into the scene
Reflexivity
Reflexivity relates to re-examining the research process by
reflecting back on activity and considering different approaches
This includes considering bias and questioning your own
practices
Feminist discourse is based upon flexibility and ‘reflexivity’,
whereby the direction of research is not predetermined, but
created through the interaction with participants
Feminist informed approaches favour qualitative methods that
can move with the participants, so facilitating reflexivity and
potential empowerment
(Letherby, 2003; Ramazanoglu 2002).
Potential limitations
There are some issues with researching from a personal
perspective on of which relates to thinking you already know
the answer to the questions (pre-conceptions)
It is possible that greater emotion and subjectivity occurs
There are possibilities that the re-distribution of power is not
real and that as a researcher you are different from those you
seek to understand

Group discussion
Consider examples of understanding you have based upon
Look at ways in which being part of a community / group will
help with:
-access to participants
-understanding of terms and practices
What are possible pros and cons of being personally involved in
research?
Purpose Statements & Research Questions
Purpose statement
Why you want to undertake this study
What you want to accomplish (Locke et al, 2007)
Outlines to the overall intention of the research proposal is a
sentence / several sentences
“…the purpose statement sets the objectives, the intent, or the
major idea of the proposal or study…” (Creswell, 2009)

Qualitative Purpose Statement
Information about the central phenomenon, the participants and
research setting
It conveys the central design and draws from the terms used in
qualitative approach
Words such as purpose, intent or objective focus upon the
statement
Tends to have a relationship approach / in terms of 2 or more
areas influence one another
Use of verbs such as describe, understand
/ develop / examining meaning
Qualitative approach often uses terms which are neutral, such
as, ‘experiences of individuals’. This is because qualitative
approach looks for the participant to describe their own
experiences
When defining terms there might be discussion about different
options / flexibility (openness is central)
Strategies to inquiry are included: e.g. Grounded theory, case
study, phenomenological
Research site is identified: e.g. classroom, organisations,
geographical area
Boundaries of focus might be stated, e.g. Women / homeless
people

Quantitative Purpose Statement
Different in terms of language and focus
Considers variables and their relationships to one another
Comes from a quantitative research ethos and deductive testing
Begins from the prospective of the major variable
Often based upon a model of comparison
Words to signal intent are used: Purpose, intent or objective
Identifies a theory, model or conceptual
framework
Identify the dependent and independent variables / as well as
amy mediating, moderating or controlled variables
Use word which connect, such as ‘relationships between’ or
‘comparison of’…showing how one variable influences another
Specific strategy of enquiry e.g. survey
Mention participants / unit of analysis / research site
Define terms and variables

Mixed Method Purpose Statement
Overall intention
Information about both qualitative and quantitative strands, and
rationale for choices
Signal words such as ‘the purpose’ or ‘the intention…’
Indicate the sequence of design planned
Triangulation / blending of approach
Include characteristics of both qualitative and quantitative /
consider the phenomenon
(Creswell, 2019)
The Importance of Good Questions
The research question should be broad enough to incorporate
the area to be investigated in a meaningful and flexible way
Research question are important to:
define the area of investigation
set boundaries of what will be covered
provide clarity and direction
A research question begins with a topic
This can be difficult and takes a while to refine
Most research topics relate to an area of interest

Research curiosity and the desire to understand is often the
starting point
Interest might be generated from a personal or professional
experience
Research Questions will also be influenced by:
Existing theoretical framework
Observations of a group / in an area of practice (your setting)
Contemporary issues which are covered
Engagement with the literature / reading and considering the
work of others can be influential
Narrowing and Clarifying
Narrowing, clarifying, and even redefining your questions is
essential to the research process
Forming the right ‘questions’ should be a process that is
informed by reading and further information
You can refine what you have
as you go along
Open minded approach is important

Good Question Checklist
A research project is a significant investment to time and
energy and so you need to know the question will hold your
interest for the duration
The question needs to be broad enough to grow a research
project / idea
Avoiding assumptions and pre-conceived ideas is important / an
open mind
Time should be spend defining terms and
being clear / to show understanding
Understanding research paradigms.pdf
Understanding research paradigms
Clare Davies* RN, RSCN, MPhil (Nursing), BSc (Hons)
Community Health, Grad Cert Child and Adolescent
Mental Health

Lecturer in Nursing, Susan Wakil School of Nursing and
Email [email protected]
Murray Fisher RN, PhD, DipAppSc (Nursing), BHSc (Nursing),
MHPEd, ITU Cert
Associate Professor, Susan Wakil School of Nursing and
Nursing Scholar in Residence, Royal Rehab
*Corresponding author
Research in brief
Keywords: Research, methodology, paradigms.
Introduction
In order to better understand research methodology, nurses need
an understanding of research paradigms. Paradigms can be
described as different ways of viewing the world and often form
the foundation from which research is undertaken. They consist
of a set of assumptions about what is reality, how knowledge
is created and what is valuable to learn. It is important that
researchers are clear about their own beliefs and assumptions
in this regard. In understanding paradigms and their impact
upon the research process, nurses will be better positioned

to understand the nature of research questions, why particular
methodologies are used to answer those questions and how
data collected is analysed and interpreted (Weaver & Olson,
2006). Consequently, this will assist nurses in developing a
clearer understanding of how to critique research, how research
results can be translated to their clinical practice and,
ultimately,
how to undertake research themselves (Scotland, 2012).
What is a research paradigm?
Put simply, a paradigm is a world view, or a belief system. It is
the lens through which we see the world around us. In research,
the paradigm governs how we ask research questions and
conduct the research. A research paradigm consists of several
components: the nature of reality or truth (ontology) which
asks the question “What is reality?”; the nature of knowledge
(epistemology) “What does it mean to know?” ; the nature of
values (axiology) “What is valuable to know?”, and; the
strategy
used (methodology) “How do we find out?”. (Creswell, 2014).

Table 1 provides a comparison of the major paradigms for each
of these components.
It is important to note that there is often overlap between
paradigms and they are not always exclusive of one another.
This
can cause confusion for the novice researcher, as often
paradigm
arguments in the literature can seem contradictory and may
differ from publication to publication. However, they are often
a
starting point for a researcher, allowing them to conceptualise
and articulate the research approach and provide them with a
foundation to work from when designing their study.
What are the major paradigms in scientific
inquiry?
There are a number of research paradigms, and numerous
sources in the literature that explain and define them (Atkinson
& Delamont, 2011; Creswell, 2014; Denzin & Lincoln, 2018;
Vogt, 2011). Here, we provide you with an overview of the
major paradigms in scientific inquiry: positivist, post-positivist,

interpretive, critical and pragmatic.
The scientific paradigm/positivism
The scientific paradigm developed from the period in history
known as the Enlightenment. This was the 18th century
intellectual movement that challenged traditional religious
views
and emphasised knowledge and reasoning (Scotland, 2012).
Positivism is based on the assumption that there is one, single
reality (ontology) and that in order to know this single reality,
the study of a phenomenon must be undertaken with objectivity
and detached impartiality (epistemology). In order to discover
this single reality in an objective way, positivist methodology
is experimental in nature, tests predetermined hypotheses
or theories and usually uses rigorous, quantitative research
methods with large sample sizes (Oliver, 2010). The positivist
researcher is detached from the research participant in order

to eliminate bias and is often blinded to specific conditions of
the research study. The objective of positivist research is to
produce data that is predictive, generalisable to a population or
situation and relies upon the concept of probability (the measure
of likelihood of something occurring) (Dorey, 2010). It employs
deductive reasoning, a thought process whereby hypotheses are
predetermined and general (what is already known), that is then
applied to what is being tested (Schneider, Haber, LoBiondo-
Wood & Whitehead, 2013). When reported, positivist research
will usually reduce data to numerical indices. A research study
that
comes from a positivist perspective will often use experimental
methodologies and data collection methods. Positivism is
criticised by some for not taking into account individuality or
the
subjectivity of human experiences (Schneider et al., 2013).
An example of research from the positivist paradigm is the
work conducted by McKechnie et al. (2016a, 2016b, 2018)
who undertook a series of quantitative studies to identify

the characteristics that could be used to predict falls in the
inpatient traumatic brain injury rehabilitation population. Using
a convenience sample of consecutively admitted patients
(N=140) in three metropolitan inpatient brain injury
rehabilitation
units, McKechnie et al. (2018) found that a model including
five
weighted predictors provided the best predictive validity of
fallers
in this population. The resultant tool had better predictive
validity
than the Ontario Modified STRATIFY falls risk screening tool.
Post-positivism
Post-positivism was developed as an approach to research
that recognised that human behaviour is complex and that the
positivist objective of unbiased, objective reporting of research
was not always possible (Clark, 1998). Post-positivist research
is based on a critical realist ontology, the belief that there is a
single reality but we cannot know it for sure, and a modified
objectivist epistemology, meaning that pure objectivity is

impossible (Sharma, 2010).
Post-positivist research uses a triangulation of approaches to
research, as it is grounded in the belief that there is no perfect
way of determining the truth, and that using different
approaches
allows the weakness of one approach to be offset by the strength
of another. Triangulation can occur within methodologies,
methods and data analysis (Oliver, 2010).
Characteristics Positivist Post-positivist Interpretive Critical
Pragmatic
Other names Scientific Naturalistic,
constructivist
Emancipatory
Aim Production
of predictive,
generalisable data
Uncover meaning of
reality as understood
by individuals or
groups
Description, exploration
and understanding of
experience

Raise awareness and
elicit social change
Solving “real world”
problems
Ontology Single reality; real
world driven by natural
causes
Critical realism Multiple subjective
realities mentally
constructed by
individuals
Historical realism Single and multiple
realities
Epistemology Researcher objectivity
and detached
impartiality; control
Modified objectivity Researcher entwined
in production of
knowledge; dialectical
Knowledge is socially
constructed
None
Research methods Quantitative Qualitative and
quantitative —
triangulation

Qualitative Qualitative Quantitative and
qualitative
Common designs/
methodologies
Descriptive, cohort,
cross-sectional, case
control, experimental,
randomised control
trials
Modified experimental,
critical multiplism
Phenomenology,
grounded theory,
ethnography, narrative,
biographical
Neo-Marxist, Feminist
Research, Queer
Theory, Participatory
Action Research
Mixed methods
research
Criticisms Does not take into
account individual
experiences
Does not always
produce well defined
answers

Limited transferability
and generalisability
Does not always
guarantee its aims of
emancipation
Flexibility in approach
can lead to confusion
Table 1: A summary of the characteristics of each of the major
paradigms
Adapted from (Denzin & Lincoln, 2018)
Post-positivist research often uses both qualitative and
quantitative methods but is criticised for not always producing
well-defined answers to research questions (Sharma, 2010)
Interpretive paradigm
An interpretive paradigm (also referred to a naturalistic or
constructivist paradigm) takes an anti-positivist approach and is
based on a relativist ontology. Relativism views reality as being
subjective and differs from person to person (Guba & Lincoln,
1994). It does not accept the concept of a single reality and

aims to describe, explore and understand the context of
naturally
occurring events. As opposed to the positivist approach, an
interpretive approach employs inductive reasoning, where
theories are not tested, but developed from specific observations
Interpretive research uses qualitative research methods with
small samples sizes in an attempt to collect rich, in-depth
data that describes the individual experiences of those being
studied (Schreier, 2018). Rather than trying to be impartial and
detached from the research process, qualitative researchers
recognise that they cannot be separated from the research
or the people involved. Interpretive research is dialectical; it is
through dialogue and interaction between the subject and the
researcher that findings are generated. The researcher sees
themselves as entwined in the knowledge being produced and
acknowledge their possible biases, rather than trying to
eliminate
them (Charmaz, 2014). Therefore, interpretive research is a

deeply self-reflective process for the researcher.
There are a number of methodological approaches that
are derived from the interpretive paradigm. Each of these
approaches is guided by a particular philosophical stance, for
example, phenomenology, grounded theory or ethnography.
Data
collection methods may include observation, interviews and/or
focus groups (Flick, 2018). Interpretive approaches are
criticised
by some for their limited transferability and the inability to
apply
the results to a general population. Policy makers tend to like
generalisable results and therefore can be reluctant to fund
interpretive research (Scotland, 2012).
An example of research from the interpretive paradigm is a
grounded theory study that explored “clinicians’ experiences of
implementing goal setting with community dwelling clients with
acquired brain injury, to develop a goal setting practice
framework”
(Prescott, Fleming & Doig, 2018, p. 2388). Using a Straussian

approach to grounded theory, Prescott et al. (2018) conducted
a series of semi-structured interviews, drawing on participant
experiences and opinions of goal-setting processes using
everyday practice to engage clients. All interviews were audio
recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were analysed
using open coding to extract key concepts that were further
tested in subsequent interviews. In this research all participants’
stories are different and are equally valued. The results describe
a three-phase process where clinicians actively engage clients in
goal setting. It is acknowledged that contextual factors
influence
how clients and clinicians engage in this process.
Critical paradigm
The critical paradigm aims to raise awareness and promote
social change. Its purpose is often to empower groups who are
marginalised, or to investigate inequalities or social injustices,
and is sometimes referred to as emancipatory research (Denzin,
2016). Critical research is based in the ontological position

of historical realism and the epistomological position of social
constructivism, believing knowledge to be socially and
historically
constructed (Scotland, 2012).
There are a number of critical research approaches that are
guided by different philosophical ideological positions; for
example feminist research, queer theory or participatory action
research are all emancipatory methodologies. Critical research
generally uses qualitative research methods to collect data and
will often seek participant involvement in the research process
in order to address inequalities in the researcher/participant
relationship and to empower those individuals to take action
for themselves (Given, 2008). However, changing systems
of oppression is not easy and the emancipation of research
participants cannot be guaranteed; therefore this paradigm is
often criticised for not fulfilling its intention (Scotland, 2012).
In an example of feminist research, Fish and Hatton (2017)
examined the gendered experiences of physical restraint on
locked wards for women with a mild to moderate intellectual

disability. The feminist analysis focused on the women’s
embodied experiences in the context of a power structure that
incorporates gender and disability. This study aimed to
challenge
existing power relationships in treatment, and attitudes towards
women with intellectual disabilities in order to explore new
responses to policy and practice.
Pragmatic paradigm
Pragmatism views the traditional research paradigms as being
prescriptive in their approach to undertaking research, and
believes that they constrain intellectual curiosity. It avoids
the ontological and epistemological arguments that have
led to paradigm tensions between positivist and interpretive
approaches, acknowledging that there are single and multiple
realities, while turning its attention to solving “real world”
problems rather than focusing on philosophical positioning

(Feilzer, 2010). Mixed methods research is a methodology that
is based on pragmatism and may employ both quantitative and
qualitative methods of data collection. It has grown in
popularity
in recent years as researchers try to address the failing of
other approaches and “do what works” (Morgan, 2014). Mixed
methods researchers should have skills in both quantitative and
qualitative research design. There is criticism of this paradigm
due to its flexible approach and the potential for confusion to
arise during design and interpretation of mixed methods
research
Hawkins, McGuire, Linder and Britt (2015a) undertook a mixed
methods study, used an “explanatory sequential mixed methods
study design to understand the influence of contextual factors
on community reintegration among injured, community-
dwelling
service members” (p. 528). The first phase, a quantitative study,
consisted of a sample of 51 individuals who completed an

online survey. The survey measured community reintegration
(participation), environmental factors (including attitudes and
support, services and assistance, physical and structural,
policies, and work and school), personal factors (including self-
efficacy) and background variables (including age, sex, military
background, time since injury, severity of injury, and
rehabilitation
program attended) (Hawkins, McGuire, Britt & Linder, 2015b).
Statistical procedures such as multivariate analysis of variance
(MANOVA) and discriminant analysis were used to determine
the relative contribution of contextual factors on discriminating
the cluster levels of community reintegration (Hawkins et al.,
2015b). The second phase was a qualitative study using
phenomenology and participant interviews to understand the
subjective experience of injured service members and explain
how contextual factors influence the different cluster levels of
community reintegration (Hawkins et al., 2015a). Participants
in phase two were selected based on their cluster affiliation for
level of community reintegration as identified in phase one.

Conclusion
A research paradigm is a set of assumptions about the nature
of reality and how knowledge is created. Paradigms are
influential in determining research questions, methodology,
methods and the way data is collected and analysed; there
should be demonstrated congruence between these in any
research study. This article presented a brief overview of the
major research paradigms in order to provide the reader with a
preliminary understanding of the topic. With an understanding
of the philosophical underpinning of research studies, nurses
and novice researchers are better positioned to be able to
comprehend, critically analyse and apply the research they read
to their clinical practice.
“ Wit h an u n d e r s t an d i ng o f t h e p hi l o s o p hi c a
l u n d e r p i nni ng
o f re s e arch s t u d i e s , nu r s e s
an d n o v i c e re s e arch e r s are
b e t t e r p o s i t i o n e d t o b e ab l e t o
c o mp reh e n d , c r i t i c a l ly an aly s e
an d ap p ly t h e re s e arch t h e y re a d

t o t h e i r c l i n i c a l p ra c t i c e . ”
References
Atkinson, P., & Delamont, S. (2011). SAGE qualitative research
methods.
Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Charmaz, K. (2014). An Invitation to Grounded Theory. In K.
Charmaz
(Ed.), Constructing Grounded Theory (2nd edn, pp. 1–21).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Clark, A. M. (1998). The qualitative-quantitative debate:
Moving from
positivism and confrontation to post-positivism and
reconciliation.
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 27(6), 1242–1249. doi:10.1046/
j.1365-2648.1998.00651.x
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: qualitative,
quantitative, and
mixed methods approaches (4th edn). Thousand Oaks: SAGE
Publications.
Denzin, N. K. (2016). Critical Qualitative Inquiry. Qualitative
inquiry,
23(1), 8–16. doi:10.1177/1077800416681864
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). The Sage handbook of
qualitative
research (5th edn). Los Angeles: Sage.
Dorey, F. (2010). The p value: what is it and what does it tell
you?
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 468(8), 2297–

2298.
doi:10.1007/s11999-010-1402-9
Feilzer, Y. (2010). Doing mixed methods research
pragmatically:
implications for the rediscovery of pragmatism as a research
paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(1), 6–16.
doi:10.1177/1558689809349691
Fish, R., & Hatton, C. (2017). Gendered experiences of physical
restraint
on locked wards for women. Disability and Society, 32(6), 790–
809.
Flick, U. (2018). Doing qualitative data collection — charting
the routes. .
In The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection (pp. 3–
16).
London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Retrieved from
http://sk.sagepub.
com/reference/the-sage-handbook-of-qualitative-data-collection.
doi:10.4135/9781526416070
Given, L. (2008). Critical Action Research. In The SAGE
Encyclopedia
of Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, California.
Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1994). Competing paradigms in
qualitative
research. In Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105–117).
London: Sage.

Hawkins, B., McGuire, F., Linder, S., & Britt, T., (2015a)
Understanding
Development, 52(5), 527–542.
Hawkins, B., McGuire, F., Britt, T., & Linder, S., (2015b)
Identifying
Development, 52(5), 527–542.
McKechnie, D., Fisher, M. J., Pryor, J., Bonser, M., & De Jesus,
J. (2018)
Development of the Sydney Falls Risk Screening Tool (SFRST)
in brain injury rehabilitation: A multisite prospective cohort
study.
Journal of Clinical Nursing, 27 (5–6): 958–968.
McKechnie, D., Fisher, M. J., & Pryor, J. (2016a) A Case-
control study
of faller characteristics in an inpatient traumatic brain injury
rehabilitation setting. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation,
31(2):
E59–E70.
McKechnie, D., Fisher, M. J., & Pryor, J. (2016b) The
characteristics
of falls in an inpatient traumatic brain injury rehabilitation
setting.
Journal of Clinical Nursing, 25(1–2):213–222.
Morgan, D. L. (2014). Pragmatism as a Paradigm for Social
Research. Qualitative inquiry, 20(8), 1045–1053.
doi:10.1177/1077800413513733

Oliver, P. (2010). The scientific method. In Understanding the
Research
Process (pp. 67–80). London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Retrieved
from http://sk.sagepub.com/books/understanding-the-research-
process. doi:10.4135/9781446279373
Prescott, S., Fleming, J., & Doig, E., (2018) Rehabilitation goal
setting with
community dwelling adults with acquired brain injury: a
theoretical
framework derived from clinician’s reflections on practice.
Disability
and Rehabilitation, 40(20), 2388–2399.
Schneider, Z., Haber, J., LoBiondo-Wood, G., & Whitehead, D.
(2013).
Nursing and midwifery research: methods and appraisal for
evidence-based practice (4th edn). Chatswood, NSW: Mosby.
Schreier, M. (2018). Sampling and generalization. In The SAGE
Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection (pp. 88–97). London:
SAGE Publications Ltd. Retrieved from http://sk.sagepub.com/
reference/the-sage-handbook-of-qualitative-data-collection.
doi:10.4135/9781526416070
Scotland, J. (2012). Exploring the philosophical underpinnings
of
research: relating ontology and epistemology to the
methodology
and methods of the scientific, interpretive and critical research
paradigms. English Language Teaching, 5(9), 9–16.
Sharma, B. (2010). Postpositivism. In A. Mills, G. Durepos, &
E. Wiebe
(Eds), Encyclopedia of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks,
CA:

SAGE publications.
Vogt, W. P. (2011). SAGE quantitative research methods. Los
Angeles,
CA: SAGE.
Weaver, K., & Olson, J. K. (2006). Understanding paradigms
used for
nursing research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 53(4), 459–469.
doi:doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03740.x
Copyright of Journal of the Australasian Rehabilitation Nurses'
Association (JARNA) is the
property of Australasian Rehabilitation Nurses' Association
(ARNA) Inc. and its content may
not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv
without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for
individual use.
Purpose Statements & Research Questions
Purpose statement

Why you want to undertake this study
What you want to accomplish (Locke et al, 2007)
Outlines to the overall intention of the research proposal is a
sentence / several sentences
“…the purpose statement sets the objectives, the intent, or the
major idea of the proposal or study…” (Creswell, 2009)
Qualitative Purpose Statement
Information about the central phenomenon, the participants and
research setting
It conveys the central design and draws from the terms used in
qualitative approach
Words such as purpose, intent or objective focus upon the
statement
Tends to have a relationship approach / in terms of 2 or more
areas influence one another
Use of verbs such as describe, understand
/ develop / examining meaning
Qualitative approach often uses terms which are neutral, such
as, ‘experiences of individuals’. This is because qualitative
approach looks for the participant to describe their own

experiences
When defining terms there might be discussion about different
options / flexibility (openness is central)
Strategies to inquiry are included: e.g. Grounded theory, case
study, phenomenological
Research site is identified: e.g. classroom, organisations,
geographical area
Boundaries of focus might be stated, e.g. Women / homeless
people
Quantitative Purpose Statement
Different in terms of language and focus
Considers variables and their relationships to one another
Comes from a quantitative research ethos and deductive testing
Begins from the prospective of the major variable
Often based upon a model of comparison
Words to signal intent are used: Purpose, intent or objective
Identifies a theory, model or conceptual
framework
Identify the dependent and independent variables / as well as
amy mediating, moderating or controlled variables
Use word which connect, such as ‘relationships between’ or
‘comparison of’…showing how one variable influences another

Specific strategy of enquiry e.g. survey
Mention participants / unit of analysis / research site
Define terms and variables
Mixed Method Purpose Statement
Overall intention
Information about both qualitative and quantitative strands, and
rationale for choices
Signal words such as ‘the purpose’ or ‘the intention…’
Indicate the sequence of design planned
Triangulation / blending of approach
Include characteristics of both qualitative and quantitative /
consider the phenomenon
(Creswell, 2019)
The Importance of Good Questions
The research question should be broad enough to incorporate
the area to be investigated in a meaningful and flexible way
Research question are important to:
define the area of investigation
set boundaries of what will be covered
provide clarity and direction

A research question begins with a topic
This can be difficult and takes a while to refine
Most research topics relate to an area of interest
Research curiosity and the desire to understand is often the
starting point
Interest might be generated from a personal or professional
experience
Research Questions will also be influenced by:
Existing theoretical framework
Observations of a group / in an area of practice (your setting)
Contemporary issues which are covered
Engagement with the literature / reading and considering the
work of others can be influential
Narrowing and Clarifying

Narrowing, clarifying, and even redefining your questions is
essential to the research process
Forming the right ‘questions’ should be a process that is
informed by reading and further information
You can refine what you have
as you go along
Open minded approach is important
Good Question Checklist
A research project is a significant investment to time and
energy and so you need to know the question will hold your
interest for the duration
The question needs to be broad enough to grow a research
project / idea
Avoiding assumptions and pre-conceived ideas is important / an
open mind
Time should be spend defining terms and
being clear / to show understanding
Research from a personal perspective

Aims
Consideration of ways in which research can be influenced by
Explore that emancipation and empowerment this makes
possible
Examine ways in which sharing can influence research
Review the areas of proposition and reflexivity
Motivation to undertake research
Personal experiences throughout life are formative in terms of
who we are
Most researchers begins with an area of interest generated from
personal and professional interest
Closeness to a community or group / experiencing an issue will
be part of the research process
It is important to be aware of personal and professional interest,
to consider the effect of connection / understanding and the
potential for bias
Insider perspective
Part of using personal experience related to be an insider
The boundaries between insider and outsider research may not
necessarily clear-cut
Some features of a researcher’s identity are innate and
unchanging, whilst other features are innate / evolving
These features influence the insider-outsider continuum
Time, place, power relationships and personalities between the

researcher and researched, and the topic under examination may
further influence the insider-outsider status (Mercer, 2007).
Being a part of a group of a community can mean language use
is accessible and there is clear relatability
This can give a confidence to the participant which is seen to be
emancipatory
Research can be a tool for empowerment ‘Giving a voice’
‘…making it possible for people to exercise power and have
more control over their lives. That means having greater voice
in institutions, agencies and situations which affect them’
(Croft and Beresford, 1993)
Emancipatory Research
Empowerment through participation
Participants can learn through research and can also feel they
can make a different
Organisations such as Mind, Age UK, Scope raise awareness
through research, influencing policy
Part of Evidence Based Practice:
‘Patient Values’
Research in health and social care to be based upon ‘inclusion’
Community, young people and Early years use accessible
approaches so they are able to include a wide range of
participants
Partnership approach adds ‘genuineness’ and ‘authenticity’
To engage those who will use the service gives an expert view

Disclosure and sharing experiences
Sharing power in the research setting can be critical to success
It is part of theoretical approaches, such as, Feminist research
which is built upon the idea of facilitation of the ‘voice’ of
participants to be heard (Letherby, 2012)
Researchers do not want to be part of the oppression and seek to
make participants feel comfortable and valued
Seeing the ‘whole person’ not just as ‘data’
Sharing experiences / disclosure by researchers are seen to be
important to create more equal and open dialogue
E.G. Oakley (1975) disclosed her own maternity experience
when interviewing women
Positionality
Positionality is awareness of personal experiences upon the
researcher
Might also be referred to as stance / where you stand in relation
to others about you
Positionality is influenced the political and socio-economic
factors
To understand the researcher must consider their own origins
and self
Research identity affects interaction with
participants and so data collection
Researcher identity
Researcher identity is important in terms of understanding your
interest
Understanding how you relate to others
Factors which will influence you will include personal and

professional
Features of race, culture, beliefs and education will influence
identity and as such perception and ways of viewing others
There will be emotion connected to identity and researchers
should be aware of how they bring this into the scene
Reflexivity
Reflexivity relates to re-examining the research process by
reflecting back on activity and considering different approaches
This includes considering bias and questioning your own
practices
Feminist discourse is based upon flexibility and ‘reflexivity’,
whereby the direction of research is not predetermined, but
created through the interaction with participants
Feminist informed approaches favour qualitative methods that
can move with the participants, so facilitating reflexivity and
potential empowerment
(Letherby, 2003; Ramazanoglu 2002).
Potential limitations
There are some issues with researching from a personal
perspective on of which relates to thinking you already know
the answer to the questions (pre-conceptions)
It is possible that greater emotion and subjectivity occurs
There are possibilities that the re-distribution of power is not
real and that as a researcher you are different from those you
seek to understand

Group discussion
Consider examples of understanding you have based upon
Look at ways in which being part of a community / group will
help with:
-access to participants
-understanding of terms and practices
What are possible pros and cons of being personally involved in
research?
MSc Social Care, Health and Wellbeing
MA Early Childhood Studies
MA Youth and Community Studies
HSC7004
Preparation for PG Research Design
MODULE GUIDE
2019/2020Term 1
Level HE7
Contents
1. Module Overview 2
2. Learning and Teaching Strategy 2
3. Module Communications 2
5. Module Description 2

6. Learning Outcomes and Assessments 3
7. Assessment Deadlines 3
8. Assessment Feedback 3
9. Module Calendar 4
10. Formative Assessment 4
11. Indicative Reading 5
12. Guidelines for the Preparation and Submission of Written
Assessments 7
13. Academic Misconduct 8
14.
Assessment…….......................................................................
.........................................................8
1. Module Overview
Module Tutor
Dr Joanne Smith
Tel. no.
01204 903784
Email
[email protected]
Office Location
T3-44
Drop-in Availability
Flexible / Wednesday 1-3pm by arrangement
Weblink to Moodle Class
https://moodle.bolton.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=11732
Weblink to Module Specification
http://modules.bolton.ac.uk/HSC7002
2. Learning and Teaching Strategy
This module has been designed to deliver effective learning and

teaching to you both as a student but also an individual working
in practice. The 200 notional hours are delivered by a number of
strategies that are effective and popular with our students.
These include classroom work with formal lecturers
incorporating discussion and debate in addressing core
concepts, interactive learning activities and problem based
learning. The sessions will be structured around a variety of
teaching and learning methods such as reading exercises,
discussions, critical thinking activities, web-based learning,
amongst others, to provide input to help you develop your
research understanding and practice.
You will be expected to prepare for classes by completing
activities set by your tutors, this may include prior reading. The
University’s Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) will provide
access to weekly materials as well as links to additional
resources such as academic journals and useful websites to aid
your learning. In addition, the University’s Library pages
provide access to a host of online resources such as e-journal
and e-book repositories.3. Module Communications
The Module Tutor’s contact details are provided at the top of
this page. You must check your University of Bolton email
address and the Moodle area dedicated to this module regularly
as many module communications are channelled through these
media.
Your Module Tutor will normally aim to respond to your email
messages within 2 full working days of receipt. However
responses will be longer in holiday periods.5. Module
Description
The aim of this module is to enable you to develop knowledge
and understanding in research design. The focus will be on an
area of practice within your discipline which will allow you to
identify an area of study that will assist in the development of
new knowledge and ultimately enhance your own personal and
professional development. You will learn to design and plan an

effective research project and evaluate its potential impact and
innovative solutions for an area of practice. This module will
provide you with a working knowledge of the principles and
practice of research design so that you are equipped to plan and
undertake independent research at advanced level.6. Learning
Outcomes and Assessments
Learning Outcomes
Assessment
LO1: Develop and critically review a research aim and research
objectives/questions and the scope of a proposed project
Assessment 1:
15 minute presentation and Q and A
LO2: Critically analyse a research plan in order to meet stated
research aim and objectives/questions
Assessment 1:
15 minute presentation and Q and A
LO3: Produce an initial critical appraisal of key literature
synthesised into an appropriate draft conceptual framework.
Assessment 2:
Proposal - 4000 words
LO4: Critically appraise research philosophies, approaches,
strategies in order to develop an initial research methodology
Assessment 2:
LO5: Critically analyse the ethical considerations of a proposed
research project
Assessment 2:
Proposal - 4000 words 7. Assessment Deadlines
Assessment item

Due Date
Weight
1
15 minute presentation
4th December 2019
30%
2
13th January 2020
70%8. Assessment Feedback
Feedback on items of assessment can be formal (such as on a
signed feedback form) or informal (such as advice from a tutor
in a tutorial). Feedback is therefore not just your grade or the
comments written on your feedback form, it is advice you get
from your tutor and sometimes your peers about how your work
is progressing, how well you have done, what further actions
you might take.
We recognise the value of prompt feedback on work submitted.
Other than in exceptional circumstances (such as might be
caused by staff illness), you can expect your assignment and
examination work to be marked and feedback provided not more
than15 working daysfrom the deadline date. However, please
note that that such feedback will be provisional and
unconfirmed until the Assessment Board has met and may
therefore be subject to change.

Please take time you read or listen to your assessment feedback.
This can be very useful in determining your strengths and key
areas for development, and can therefore help you improve on
future grades.9. Module Calendar
Session No.
Date or Week Commencing
Topics Covered
1
25.09.2019
Research and PG study
Formulating research questions / influences upon researchers
2
02.10.2019
Qualitative and quantitative approaches: Positivism, anti-
positivism and the middle ground
Library induction for PG study Dawn Grundy
3
09.10.2019
Research methods and methodology: Strengths and weaknesses /
the importance of a critical approach
4
16.10.2019
Research as a way of making changes to practice / collecting an
evidence base
Action Learning
5
23.10.2019
Research methods and the influence of the personal perspective
Dr Martina Kirlew
6
30.10.2019
Research skills / quality of the researcher/ the research
environment
7
06.11.2019

Ontology and Epistemology
8
13.11.2019
Research process / options and approaches / ways of analysing
findings and presenting information
9
20.11.2019
Individual tutorials
10
27.11.2019
Ethics and the rights of individuals and groups / The journey of
the researcher
11
04.12.2019
Presentations
12
11.12.2019
Individual tutorials 10. Formative Assessment
Formative assessment is employed to support your learning on
the module, allowing you to reflect on feedback on your
progress from your tutors and peers. It takes a variety of forms
including seminar activities, discussion groups and tutorial
sessions and does not contribute to the final module mark.
Formative assessment is intended to support you with producing
your final piece of writing for this module.
11. Indicative Reading
Aveyard, H. (2014) Doing a Literature Review in Health and
Social Care (3rd Ed.) Berkshire, Open University Press.
Bell, J. (2014) Doing your research project: A guide for first-
time researchers in education, health and social science. (6th
Ed.) Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Open University Press.
Bowling, A. (2014) Research Methods in Health (4th Ed.)
Buckingham, Open University Press.
Clough, P. and Nutbrown, C. A (2012) Student’s Guide to

Methodology (3rd Ed.) London: Sage.
Bradford, S and Cullen, F (eds) (2012) Research and Research
Methods for Youth Practitioners. Oxon. Routledge.
Creswell, J.W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative,
Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approach. London, UK: Sage
Publications.
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., Jackson, P.R. (2012)
Management Research (4th Ed.) London, Sage.
Fleming, J and Hudson, N (2009) Young People and Research
Participation. In Wood J and Hine, J (eds) Work With Young
People. London. Sage.
Gray, D. (2014). Doing Research in the Real World. London,
UK: Sage Publications.
Henn, M., Weinstein, M. (2009). A Critical Introduction to
Social Research. London, UK: Sage Publications
Holliday, A. (2016). Doing and Writing Qualitative Research.
London, UK: Sage.
Iphofen, R (2009) Ethical Decision Making in Social Research:
A Practical Guide. Basingstoke. Palgrave MacMillan.
Marshall C. and Rossman G. (2011) Designing Qualitative
Research (5th Ed) London: Sage
Neale, J. (Ed) (2009) Research Methods in Health and Social
Care Basingstoke, Palgrave MacMillan.
O’ Reilly M and Kiyimba, N. (2015) Advance Qualitative
Research: A guide to using theory. London, UK: Sage
Publications.
Parahoo, K. (2014) Nursing Research: Principles, Process and
Issues (3rd Ed.) Basingstoke, Palgrave MacMillan.

Research Methods Critical Review

Research Methods Critical Review

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Research Methods Critical Review

Similar to Research Methods Critical Review (17)

More from verad6

More from verad6 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Research Methods Critical Review