Qualitative research: Understanding its underlying philosophies

Adelina  Asmawi; Md. Saiful  Alam

doi:10.59400/fes.v2i2.1320

Qualitative research: Understanding its underlying philosophies

Adelina Asmawi Department of Language and Literacy Education, Faculty of Education, University Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia
Md. Saiful Alam Department of English, World University of Bangladesh, Uttara Sector 17H, Dhaka 1230, Bangladesh

Article ID: 1320

630 Views

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59400/fes.v2i2.1320

Keywords: qualitative research; ontology; epistemology; realism; relativism; constructivism; interpretivism

Abstract

In the realm of research, it is emphasized that research must be grounded in a clearly stated research philosophy and set out early in the research process. It is significant because research philosophy enables researchers to promote clarity and decisions about the research design and guide them in identifying a suitable design. Therefore, understanding the underlying philosophies of qualitative research is crucial for researchers, especially those who are just starting their journey in this field. This paper aims to provide beginning researchers with a basis for the development of key philosophical understandings related to qualitative research. A descriptive analysis of the philosophies of ontology and epistemology and the subsets of philosophies under these two umbrella terms is presented as an introduction to the philosophical foundation of qualitative research. The paper serves as a basis for novice researchers to distinctively identify the philosophical underpinnings of qualitative research and as a resource that enables and guides them towards designing and conducting qualitative studies.

References

[1]Crossan F. Research philosophy: towards an understanding. Nurse Researcher. 2003; 11(1): 46–55. doi: 10.7748/nr2003.10.11.1.46.c5914

[2]Mkansi M. Acheampong EA. Research philosophy debates and classifications: students’ dilemma. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods. 2012; 10(2): 32–140.

[3]Kirongo A, Odoyo C. Research philosophy design and methodologies: A systematic review of research paradigms in information technology. Global Scientific Journals. 2020; 8(5).

[4]Mauthner NS. Research philosophies and why they matter. In: How to Keep your Doctorate on Track. Elgar; 2020. pp. 76–86. doi: 10.4337/9781788975636.00018

[5]Madden AD. A review of basic research tools without the confusing philosophy. Higher Education Research & Development. 2021; 41(5): 1633–1647. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2021.1920895

[6]Pae CU. Why Systematic Review rather than Narrative Review? Psychiatry Investigation. 2015; 12(3): 417. doi: 10.4306/pi.2015.12.3.417

[7]Booth A, Harris J, Croot E, et al. Towards a methodology for cluster searching to provide conceptual and contextual “richness” for systematic reviews of complex interventions: case study (CLUSTER). BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2013; 13(1). doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-13-118

[8]Elo S, Kyngäs H. The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2008; 62(1): 107–115. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x

[9]Aspers P, Corte U. What is Qualitative in Qualitative Research. Qualitative Sociology. 2019; 42(2): 139–160. doi: 10.1007/s11133-019-9413-7

[10]Morse JM, Field PA. The purpose of qualitative research. In: Boston MA (editor). Nursing Research. Springer; 1996. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4899-4471-9_1

[11]Henwood K. Qualitative Research. In: Teo T (editor). Encyclopedia of Critical Psychology. Springer; 2014. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-5583-7_256

[12]Brown-Saracino J. Unsettling Definitions of Qualitative Research. Qualitative Sociology. 2021; 44(4): 591–597. doi: 10.1007/s11133-021-09498-9

[13]Gläser-Zikuda M, Hagenauer G, Stephan M. The Potential of Qualitative Content Analysis for Empirical Educational Research. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung Forum: Qualitative Social Research. 2020; 21(1). doi: 10.17169/FQS-21.1.3443

[14]Siiman LA, Rannastu-Avalos M, Pöysä-Tarhonen J, et al. Opportunities and Challenges for AI-Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis: An Example from Collaborative Problem-Solving Discourse Data. In: Proceedings of Innovative Technologies and Learning: 6th International Conference, ICITL 2023; 28–30 August 2023; Porto, Portugal. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-40113-8_9

[15]Mbanaso UM, Abrahams L, Okafor KC. Research philosophy, design and methodology. In: Research Techniques for Computer Science, Information Systems and Cybersecurity. Nature Switzerland: Springer; 2023. pp. 81–113.

[16]Bashir S. Philosophical and Methodological Aspects of a Mixed-Methods Research: A Review of the Academic Literature. Journal of Independent Studies and Research-Management, Social Sciences and Economics. 2017; 15(1): 31–49. doi: 10.31384/jisrmsse/2017.15.1.3

[17]Sahin MD, Öztürk G. Mixed method research: Theoretical foundations, designs and its use in educational research. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research. 2019; 6(2): 301–310. doi: 10.33200/ijcer.574002

[18]Baškarada S, Koronios A. A Philosophical Discussion of Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Research in Social Science. Qualitative Research Journal. 2018; 18(1): 2–21. doi: 10.1108/qrj-d-17-00042

[19]Audi R. Epistemology: A Contemporary Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge, 3rd ed. Routledge; 2010. doi: 10.4324/9780203846469

[20]Bowden BG. Empiricism, epistemology and modern postmodernism: a critique. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal. 2019; 14(4): 481–497. doi: 10.1108/qrom-02-2019-1726

[21]Markie P, Folescu M. Rationalism vs. Empiricism. Stanford University; 2004.

[22]Reed B. A new argument for skepticism. Philosophical Studies. 2008; 142(1): 91–104. doi: 10.1007/s11098-008-9299-9

[23]Hathcoat JD, Barnes LLB. Explaining the Relationship Among Fundamentalism and Authoritarianism: An Epistemic Connection. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion. 2010; 20(2): 73–84. doi: 10.1080/10508611003607884

[24]Hage J. Three kinds of coherentism. In: Coherence: Insights from philosophy, jurisprudence and artificial intelligence Dordrecht. Springer; 2013. pp. 1–32.

[25]Guyon H, Kop JL, Juhel J, et al. Measurement, ontology, and epistemology: Psychology needs pragmatism-realism. Theory & Psychology. 2018; 28(2): 149–171. doi: 10.1177/0959354318761606

[26]Calvente S, Manzo S. Empiricism, Early Modern. In: Jalobeanu D, Wolfe C (editors). Encyclopedia of Early Modern Philosophy and the Sciences. Springer; 2020. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-20791-9_588-1

[27]Hossain FM. A Critical Analysis of Empiricism. Open Journal of Philosophy. 2014; 04(03): 225–230. doi: 10.4236/ojpp.2014.43030

[28]Pellegrini PA. We are all rationalists, but it is not Enough: Ways of Explaining the Social Acceptance of a Theory. Foundations of Science. 2023; 1–20. doi: 10.1007/s10699-023-09913-0

[29]Taliaferro C. Rationality (Philosophical). In: Runehov ALC, Oviedo L (editors). Encyclopedia of Sciences and Religions. Springer; 2013. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-8265-8_1549

[30]Tate JW. Toleration and its possibilities: Relativism, Skepticism, and Pluralism. In: Sardoč M (editor). The Palgrave Handbook of Toleration. Palgrave Macmillan; 2022. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-42121-2_2

[31]Jash A. Skepticism (Hinduism). In: Long JD, Sherma RD, Jain P, et al. (editors). Hinduism and tribal religions. Encyclopedia of Indian Religions. Dordrecht: Springer; 2022. doi: 10.1007/978-94-024-1188-1_460

[32]Feuerstein M. Media Literacy in Support of Critical Thinking. Journal of Educational Media. 1999; 24(1): 43–54. doi: 10.1080/1358165990240104

[33]Høffding S, Martiny K, Roepstorff A. Can we trust the phenomenological interview? Metaphysical, epistemological, and methodological objections. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences. 2021; 21(1): 33–51. doi: 10.1007/s11097-021-09744-z

[34]Fumerton R. Foundationalism and non-noundationalism. In: Peters M (editor). Encyclopedia of Educational Philosophy and Theory. Springer; 2020. doi: 10.1007/978-981-287-532-7_688-1

[35]Bouchard Y. The Foundationalism–Coherentism Opposition Revisited: The Case for Complementarism. Foundations of Science. 2007; 12(4): 325–336. doi: 10.1007/s10699-007-9110-y

[36]Young JO. Coherentism. In: Runehov ALC, Oviedo L (editors). Encyclopedia of Sciences and Religions. Springer; 2013. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-8265-8_1600

[37]Sanches de Oliveira G. Pragmatism. In: The Palgrave Encyclopedia of the Possible. Palgrave Macmillan; 2022. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-98390-5_241-1

[38]Menand L. The Metaphysical Club: A Story of Ideas in America. Palgrave Macmillan; 2002.

[39]Maedche A. Ontology—Definition & Overview. In: Ontology Learning for the Semantic Web. The Kluwer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science. Springer; 2002. p. 665. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4615-0925-7_2

[40]Hathcoat JD, Meixner C, Nicholas MC. Ontology and Epistemology. In: Liamputtong P (editor). Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences. Springer; 2018. doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-2779-6_56-1

[41]Jacquette D. Ontology. London: Routledge; 2014. doi: 10.4324/9781315710655

[42]Craig E. Realism and antirealism. In The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Taylor and Francis; 1998. doi: 10.4324/9780415249126-N049-1

[43]Erismann C. Realism. In: Lagerlund H (editor). Encyclopedia of Medieval Philosophy. Springer; 2020. doi: 10.1007/978-94-024-1665-7_432

[44]Staudacher A. Realism (Metaphysical, Internal, Common Sense, Naïve, Scientific). In: Binder MD, Hirokawa N, Windhorst U (editors). Encyclopedia of Neuroscience. Springer; 2009. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-29678-2_4946

[45]Bhaskar R. Dialectic: The Pulse of Freedom. Verso; 1993.

[46]Bhaskar R, Hartwig M. Enlightened Common Sense: The Philosophy of Critical Realism. Routledge; 2016. doi: 10.4324/9781315542942

[47]Vandenberghe F. What’s Critical about Critical Realism?: Essays in Reconstructive Social Theory. Routledge; 2013. doi: 10.4324/9780203798508

[48]Smith CS. Critical realism. In: Foundations of Interprofessional Health Education. Springer; 2023. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-33414-6_4

[49]Kipfer BA. Encyclopedic Dictionary of Archaeology. Springer; 2021. pp. 178–1178.

[50]Affolter J. Relativism. In: Chatterjee DK (editor). Encyclopedia of Global Justice. Springer; 2011. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-9160-5_123

[51]Refinetti R. Relativism. In: Leeming DA (editor). Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. Springer; 2014. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-6086-2_568

[52]Craig E. Relativism. In: Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Routledge; 1998. doi: 10.4324/9780415249126-N050-1

[53]Glazer M. Cultural Relativism. McAllen; 2011.

[54]Samuel RD, Eldadi O, Galily Y, et al. Mobility and Migration Experiences of Transnational Coaches within the Israeli Handball Context. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2021; 53: 101853. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2020.101853

[55]Henson D. Constructivism in Archaeology Education. In: Smith C (editor). Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology. Springer; 2014. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-0465-2_2084

[56]Gogus A. Constructivist Learning. In: Seel NM (editor). Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. Boston: Springer; 2012. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_142

[57]Giliberto M. Constructivism, Overview. In: Teo T (editor). Encyclopedia of Critical Psychology. Springer; 2014. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-5583-7_350

[58]Phillips MJ. Towards a social constructionist, criticalist, Foucauldian-informed qualitative research approach: Opportunities and challenges. SN Social Sciences. 2023; 3(10): 175. doi: 10.1007/s43545-023-00774-9

[59]Vitale G. Research Methodology. In: Understanding Supply Chain Digitalization Through Actor-Network Theory. SIDREA Series in Accounting and Business Administration. Springer; 2023. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-30988-5_3

[60]Seibold LKC. Methodology. In: Family Businesses’ Growth. Family businesses and SMEs. Springer; 2020. doi: 10.1007/978-3-658-29396-3_3

[61]Goldkuhl G. Pragmatism vs Interpretivism in Qualitative Information Systems Research. European Journal of Information Systems, 2012; 21: 135–146. doi: 10.1057/ejis.2011.54

[62]Liyanage SIH. Methodology. In: Producing Green Knowledge and Innovation. Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management. Springer; 2022. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-97850-1_10

Published

2024-06-12

How to Cite

Asmawi, A., & Alam, M. S. (2024). Qualitative research: Understanding its underlying philosophies. Forum for Education Studies, 2(2), 1320. https://doi.org/10.59400/fes.v2i2.1320

Download Citation

Issue

Vol. 2 No. 2 (2024)

Section

Article

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Editor-in-Chief

Dr. Surapati Pramanik

Nandalal Ghosh B.T. College, India

eISSN

3029-2956

Publication Frequency

Quarterly

About the Publisher

Academic Publishing insists on taking academic exchange and publication as the main line, carrying out comprehensive management based on science and technology, and fully exploring excellent international publishing resources. Within 5 years, it will form a strategic framework and scale with science (S), technology (T), medicine (M), education (E), and humanities and arts (H) as the main publishing fields. Academic Publishing is headquartered in Singapore and based in Malaysia, with the United States and China providing the main scientific and academic resources. At the same time, it has established long-term good cooperative relations with other publishing companies, scientific research communities, and academic organizations in more than a dozen countries and regions. Academic Publishing uses English and Chinese as its main publishing languages, mainly publishing books, journals, and conference papers in print and online. The vast majority of publications follow the international open access policy, providing stable and long-term quality and professional publications. With the joint efforts of the expert team and our professional editorial team, our publications will gradually be indexed by international databases in stages to provide convenient and professional retrieval for various scholars. At the same time, manuscripts we accept will be subject to the peer review principle, and cutting-edge and innovative research articles will be preferentially accepted for peer reference and discussion. All kinds of our publications are welcome for peer to contribute, access, and download.

more

Volume Arrangement

2025

2024

2023

Featured Articles

Diachronic analysis of Spanish scientific production on teaching methodologies in Primary Education: A scientometric and conceptual perspective (2000–2023)

The evaluation of science is essential to ensuring the quality, validity, and reliability of scientific results. Science needs to undergo a review process to ensure the rigorousness of scientific output. This evaluation provides a solid basis for political and economic decisions related to the design and execution of research projects, the establishment of new lines of research, or the identification of areas of specialization. This paper analyses diachronically the Spanish scientific production related to the implementation and development of teaching methodologies in primary education and indexed in the Scopus and Web of Science databases during the period 2000–2023. This analysis is carried out on the one hand, from a scientometric perspective, based on the analysis of indicators such as diachronic production, the journals with the highest scientific productivity, and the most productive institutions, and, on the other hand, from a conceptual perspective, trying to define its relationship with other areas of education. The general results of this study reveal two clear stages: the first, up to 2010, with little scientific production; and the second, from 2011 onwards, characterised by a general growth. The relationship between this field and others such as initial teacher training, ICT, and didactics is also evident.

The relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and classroom management practices in secondary schools

This study explores the intricate relationship between teacher self-efficacy and classroom management practices in secondary schools in the Mansehra district of Pakistan. Teacher self-efficacy, defined as the belief in one’s ability to manage and influence classroom environments effectively, has been identified as a critical factor influencing both teaching performance and student outcomes. The research employed a mixed-method approach, gathering data from 62 teachers and 310 students using both online surveys (via Google Forms) and physical questionnaires to ensure a diverse and inclusive participant pool. Data analysis was conducted using two complementary tools: SPSS and Smart PLS. SPSS was used for descriptive statistics and inferential analyses, such as t-tests, chi-square tests, and measures of central tendency, to offer an overview of group differences and relationships between variables. Meanwhile, Smart PLS was employed for Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), a technique suited for complex models and smaller sample sizes. This method allowed for the analysis of both direct and indirect relationships between the study variables—teacher self-efficacy, teaching practices, and classroom management. The findings reveal a significant positive correlation between teacher self-efficacy and classroom management practices. Additionally, teaching practices were found to mediate this relationship, indicating that higher levels of self-efficacy not only directly improve classroom management but also enhance teaching performance, which in turn contributes to better-managed classrooms. These results suggest that interventions aimed at enhancing teacher self-efficacy can have far-reaching effects on educational outcomes. The study highlights the need for focused teacher development programs that foster self-efficacy, thereby improving classroom management, student engagement, and overall academic success.

Artificial Intelligence in education: A comprehensive study

This comprehensive study delves into the multifaceted role of AI in education, exploring its applications, benefits, challenges, and future implications. The purpose of the study is to show how AI in education helps educators identify gaps in student knowledge and provide targeted feedback to improve learning outcomes. As a methodology, the library method and the study and review of various documents have been used in this research. The study examines the diverse range of AI technologies employed in educational settings, including intelligent tutoring systems, personalized learning platforms, educational chatbots, and virtual reality simulations. Furthermore, the study delves into the numerous benefits that AI brings to education. It highlights how AI-powered analytics and data-driven insights enable educators to gain deeper insights into student learning patterns, identify areas for improvement, and tailor instructional strategies accordingly. Additionally, AI-driven tools promote inclusivity by providing personalized support to learners with diverse needs and learning styles. Despite its transformative potential, the study also acknowledges the challenges and ethical considerations associated with integrating AI into education. Data privacy, algorithmic bias, and the digital divide are examined in detail, emphasizing the importance of responsible AI deployment and ethical guidelines. Looking ahead, the study explores the future implications of AI in education and the evolving role of educators in AI-enabled classrooms. It discusses how AI technologies will continue to evolve, offering new opportunities for collaborative learning, skill development, and lifelong education. In conclusion, this comprehensive study underscores the profound impact of AI on education and the need for thoughtful implementation strategies that prioritize equity, inclusivity, and ethical considerations. By harnessing the potential of AI, education systems can better prepare learners for the challenges and opportunities of the future.

Enhancing adult learner success in higher education through decision tree models: A machine learning approach

This article explores the use of machine learning, specifically Classification and Regression Trees (CART), to address the unique challenges faced by adult learners in higher education. These learners confront socio-cultural, economic, and institutional hurdles, such as stereotypes, financial constraints, and systemic inefficiencies. The study utilizes decision tree models to evaluate their effectiveness in predicting graduation outcomes, which helps in formulating tailored educational strategies. The research analyzed a comprehensive dataset spanning the academic years 2013–2014 to 2021–2022, evaluating the predictive accuracy of CART models using precision, recall, and F1 score. Findings indicate that attendance, age, and Pell Grant eligibility are key predictors of academic success, demonstrating the strong capability of the model across various educational metrics. This highlights the potential of machine learning (ML) to improve data-driven decision-making in educational settings. The results affirm the effectiveness of Decision Tree (DT) models in meeting the educational needs of adult learners and underscore the need for institutions to adapt their strategies to provide more inclusive and supportive environments. This study advocates for a shift towards nuanced, data-driven approaches in higher education, emphasizing the development of strategies that address the distinct challenges of adult learners, aiming to enhance inclusivity and support within the sector.