(IMAESCII521) Forum Short Notes: Module 1 - Reflections on Assumptions and Beliefs in Social Research (Ontology and Values Systems)



(I got this chance to take to a splendid photo of the Clyde River with almost perfect reflection of the bridge. Yet research allows us to investigate the causalities and relationships. And sometimes, they may be similar from externally, but internally (and empirically, there are some variations. Research allows us too, to reflect on these observed phenomena and continuously engage with them.)


(Read together with this blog post related to Module 1 HERE.)

Here are my short notes and contributions to my classmates' discussion in class. The link to my personal blog post is linked above. This way, the blog posts will not be too wordy and long. 

All my 8 short discussion posts are in PINK text! Enjoy!

================================

PART I

Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Nhi Nguyen - Monday, 25 January 2021, 8:54 PM

Hi Kirstern!

Though I am quite struggling to start with Research methods, I'd like to contribute to your amazing post with my own view.
I shared similar views with your about the link between the quantitative approach and objectivity, link between qualitative approach and subjective experiences.
However,
I think that:
- For your interpretation on Candidate 3 and 4: feminist epistemology is not limited to research topics/themes about feminism/gender issues. In my opinion, feminist epistemology is more like a philosophy that influences/manipulates ones' beliefs, conceptions and the constructing process of reality. "Feminist epistemology and philosophy of science studies the ways in which gender does and ought to influence our conceptions of knowledge, knowers, and practices of inquiry and justification. It identifies how dominant conceptions and practices of knowledge attribution, acquisition, and justification disadvantage women and other subordinated groups, and strives to reform them to serve the interests of these groups." (Feminist Epistemology and Philosophy of Science: in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). In other words, research about feminism/gender issues can be associated with Feminist Epistemology while Feminist Epistemology is not necessarily associated with research about feminism/gender issues. ( I'm not sure it make sense with you haha).
- For Candidate 1: "understanding the ways in which individuals interpret their decisions and choices" is referred to the aim of the research, which might be for explanation, rather than an approach to research. For me, the participatory approach means that both the researcher and the target groups/participants involve in the process of research. The researcher, rather than works on the participants, but works with them to co-construct the reality and accordingly the research design. 

Sorry if my language is confusing as I tried to explain but I lack "exact words" to deliver my thoughts in a scientific way :D

=====

Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Mc Ronald Ι Banderlipe - Monday, 1 February 2021, 4:34 PM

Hi Nhi,

Don't apologise for the lack of scientific terminologies. We are all on the same page.

I wonder though whether there is a difference between 'influencing' and 'manipulating. Not that I found yours to be intriguing. But I question whether the 'influencing' act of research and meaning-making could actually 'manipulate' behaviours/policy responses as a result of analysis. In the same way, I wonder whether research data can be heavily influenced and manipulated if one has the necessary discipline (Isn't it we are encouraged to clean the data first before performing any analysis?)

Thank you for this thought, Nhi. This will make me think more.
😉

 =====

Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Nhi Nguyen - Wednesday, 3 March 2021, 11:34 PM

Hi McRhon,
Sorry for this late reply because I have just seen it now. And thank you for your thought-provoking question although I'm not sure I got your point correctly :d !!!
Well I just tried to give you my answer based on my own guess.
I think that research data can be influenced by researcher's paradigms, disciplines or preferences. This can be manifested during the interview process, for example, where the conversation is controlled and developed by the researcher through his/her questions. Another example might be the process of the researcher analysing or "coding" the data ( the transcripts from interviews). Also, the literature used to be the framework that forms the research can also be heavily influenced by the researcher's own preference. As the literature then is used to analyse the findings, it accordingly influences the results and implications of the research. In other words, I think that the research data can be heavily influenced and manipulated by the reseacher's beliefs, philosophies, disciplines or paradisms, in all phases of the research ( choice of literature, data collection process, data analysis, etc).
How does it sound? Omg now it's my turn to question myself and think more haha. But so happy to engage with your insightful perspective McRhon ^^


===================================

PART II

Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Andreas Kollias - Friday, 29 January 2021, 9:25 AM

Dear Sego and Kirsten in our 2nd meeting I tried to offer some ideas about how to design a research project from an intersectionality lens. Here is my presentation pptx but you have also to check our 2nd meeting recorded video (last part, maybe 10 to 15 mins). I also attach a paper which I used for my presentation.

 As I pointed out in my presentation intersectionality in research projects may involve quantitative, qualitative and mixed research strategies. While intersectionality can offer great insights regarding how to frame and define research problems and research questions, researchers need to have a good understanding of research methods to be able to actually do an intersectional research. This is also true regarding any theoretical framework or lens you may want to adopt, from critical theory to feminist approaches, marxism and so on...

Here are some more papers on this issue.

Quantitative research strategies

  1. Else-Quest, N. M., & Hyde, J. S. (2016). Intersectionality in quantitative psychological research: II. Methods and techniquesPsychology of Women Quarterly40(3), 319-336.
  2. Bauer, G. R., & Scheim, A. I. (2019). Advancing quantitative intersectionality research methods: Intracategorical and intercategorical approaches to shared and differential constructsSocial Science & Medicine226, 260-262.

Qualitative research strategies

You can also check the papers in

Social Issues, 76(4). Special Issue: Applications of Intersectionality to Critical Social Issues. https://spssi.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/toc/15404560/2020/76/4

 =====

Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Mc Ronald Ι Banderlipe - Monday, 1 February 2021, 4:37 PM

Thanks for these useful pieces of info on intersectionality research, Andreas. I did particularly liked the last part of our class when we discussed this. There's so much to tackle. Yet, intersectionalities also operate in tiers when it comes to analysis. Which intersections could reflect more significant observations and linkages? How do we act on those and how do we ensure that those intersections, though still valid could be pursued for future research?

Thank you.


=====


Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Andreas Kollias - Monday, 8 February 2021, 9:44 AM

Dear McRhon, your questions are very challenging.

As Misra et al (2020) argue, "one misunderstanding about the comparative nature of intersectional research is the implication that intersectional researchers must incorporate variation on all potential socially constructed dimensions of difference in their sample and in their analyses. Exploring all of the possible intersections of race, gender, class, educational attainment, relationship status, parenthood, sexuality, gender identity, nationality, ability, etc. is simply not feasible in a practical sense." (p. 5)

Therefore, researchers have to identify and focus upon "... the intersections that are most salient for her particular argument, reducing the complexity of the analysis, while still leveraging the insights of intersectionality." (ibid).

In particular, "researchers should consider which intersections matter most for the research question being posed, focusing on the intersections that seem most salient based on the research focus ... No one project can cover every base; yet, they can be designed creatively to consider how simple additive categories may not fully uncover the social processes of interest. Intersectional researchers work to analyze the most salient statuses for their research question, recognizing that exploring other socially constructed dimensions of difference might lead to different insights." (ibid., p. 5-6).

From my perspective, I think that in this discussion we should also consider the issue of who chooses which intersections matter most for the research question being posed. One answer to this question is "the researcher chooses which intersections matter most" because he or she is the one who states the research questions in the first place. This is quite reasonable because the researcher(s) have, or should have, a very well articulated theoretical framework and a good overview of the relevant literature in the field that can guide them in their efforts to identify the intersections that matter most.However, this can be problematic. What if the people under study think that other intersections than the ones identified by the researcher(s) matter most in their lives? Should we involve research participants in such discussions in order to inform how our research questions are stated? If yes, then how can we ensure that some crucial intersections are not neglected because these are not considered to be salient from the research participants?


Ref
Misra, J., Curington, C. V., & Green, V. M. (2020). Methods of intersectional research. Sociological Spectrum, 1-20. DOI: 10.1080/02732173.2020.1791772


=====


Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Mc Ronald Ι Banderlipe - Wednesday, 10 February 2021, 4:15 PM


This is a provocation Andreas. The note you provided poses a challenge for a researcher to know what the purpose of reseach is and who is this researcher trying to serve. In many ways, I am privy to some researchers directed towards profit-making, and I wonder sometimes whether these motivated researches could be trusted.

=================================

PART III

Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Kenneth Nkumire - Thursday, 28 January 2021, 3:20 AM

Reflection on assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

Dear all,
In my opinion, the first candidate emphasises on the principle of informed consent of the participant by explaining the objective of the research study and methodology adopted during data collection. This will help in designing the most appropriate data collection tools for the respective participants under study. Explaining to the participants the purpose of the study. This would help investigator to generate the most appropriate actions to be undertaken throughout the research process and what specific relevant theories can adopted if the research is to contribute to meaningful knowledge building (Hellen O, 2007). Collaborative paradigm becomes imperative during the research process where gender differences involving both men and women can help the investigator to hold different dialogues with different social groups in the community in order to construct ideas and opinions in the research process (Kollias & Anastasopoulou, 2021). This can also enable the investigator to obtain informed consent, protect and ensure the safety of study participants throughout the research process.
In my opinion the third candidate is closer to my assumption because I also do believe that education of women and lifelong learning which has a lower socio-economic background (Hellen O, 2007). The feminist theories become a key in conducting research considering the role women play in the in the society and bringing them on the research agenda. As social beings, we must constantly understand our environmental factors, circumstances and facts that are related to our personal and social needs. In this discussion I will highlights that why social research is so important and provide my assumptions and beliefs related to social research and compare it with all the candidates and will also refer to illustrate how we can use the knowledge we have acquired for the benefit of humanity. The human mind seeks knowledge to improve and maintain our personal happiness now and in the future. We do this through social research methods that represent openness and experimental cycles. Research can be an educated guess or it can depend on scientists' perceptions of human behaviour and climate and how we can best understand our environment. Social research also poses "why" questions, including how deviations, poverty, illegal behaviour and prejudice manifest themselves and how socially beneficial outcomes can be achieved.
We all know knowledge I vital aspect in research. We also know the use effective methods would help in understanding the most appropriate tools which can be designed and adopted throughout the research process. These will always help us in collecting data from different categories of respondents during interviews. The use of ethnographic observations in research would be imperative in future when carrying out research. This means living within a particular community, trying to understand their socio-cultural beliefs, practices and ways of doing certain things. Through such ethnographic observations and experience we can discover new knowledge that can validate qualitative data especially using Focus Group Discussions. Through our interaction with human beings in their natural settings, we discover encounters in our own personal experience. Although techniques can transform social research, we can use the above methods, but the following research techniques give us a more interesting understanding of human behaviour and why we do our own things. Whether it's based on our experience with a person's insights, their position on the scale, or a tick entered in a survey, every observation is qualitative from the start. However, these functions are neither qualitative nor quantitative.
All in all, I think the third candidate also outlined the need for social research and discussed some of the methods social scientists can use. Research will always be needed to get people to focus on social issues and the characteristics of human activity. There are several aspects to consider. Well-being, illegal behaviour, aging and poverty. To mention but a few examples, constant research will always be needed to change social problems affecting humans in their natural environment, and even some reasons can be left out. When this is done, policy makers and stakeholders can be informed of the next course of action especially in programming for the local communities.
In future when carrying out my dissertation titled “The Perception of Individuals on Adult Education towards Career Advancement “under the IMAESC program will adopt a combination of both qualitative and quantitative approaches of data collection. However, much emphasis will be on the qualitative research design mainly focusing on knowledge and perception towards adult education. The rationale for choosing a qualitative approach will be to obtain a more comprehensive exploration of individual experiences in line with the study approach. This will also be intended to gain deeper understanding of people’s opinions concerning adult education and develop potential hypothesis based on the research objectives.


=====

Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Mc Ronald Ι Banderlipe - Monday, 1 February 2021, 4:41 PM

Hi Kenneth,

I liked your explanation on 'ethonographic observations' and you clearly hit the nail's head perfectly. Situating this however in an adult education research may be a bit problematic, especially if our intention is to understand where the challenges of 'access', 'privilege' and 'priority' lies. And this is where you rightly emphasised the need for a qualitative plus quantitative approach to elicit various realities that either of these approaches could provide.

Journeying with you on this thinking! 

=================================

PART IV


Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Justyna Ataman - Tuesday, 26 January 2021, 8:53 PM

Reading the statements, I have instinctively felt that the position of the third and fourth candidate reverberate my interests and beliefs about social research. In my opinion, the third statement adopts the paradigm of feminist epistemologies. I think that considering gender in research is very important, as gender strongly affects how knowledge is formulated in our human societies. The emphasis on the group analysis rather than on the individual seems both the possible strengths and weaknesses of this approach. In my opinion, the advantage of considering a group as the object of research allows for an investigation of power relations, discrimination, intersectionality. Nonetheless, on the downside, it may lead to certain generalizations, which are not accurate in all cases.
The fourth statement represents the pragmatism paradigm and mixed social research. It matches my beliefs in considering that one should stay open-minded to worldviews and methodologies in the field of social science. Also, what I liked about this statement is the researcher's awareness of his own interest in the research. I think the advantage of this paradigm is openness, a range of tools, and focus on the subject of the research that determines which paradigm can be applied to best analyze the question. On the downside, I suspect that wishing to adopt a variety of approaches makes the researcher unable to conclude radical research, corresponding to a specific paradigm in depth. I think that when a subject in social sciences is presented through various paradigms in radical ways, the results form certain guidelines or borders within which discourse can exist.

=====

In reply to Justyna Ataman

Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Mc Ronald Ι Banderlipe - Monday, 1 February 2021, 4:44 PM

Hi Justyna,

I wonder why when I read the profile of candidate number 4, you were the first person who came to my mind. Perhaps our conversations shaped my impression of your inclination towards education as a 'playground' to experiment. On another note, I am also interested to find out more about some research activities (not necessarily IMAESC) where participatory actions have been done. We can share notes when we find one.

===============================

PART V


Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Khadija Batool - Sunday, 31 January 2021, 10:30 AM

Thank you all for contributing the forum with thoughts, I was late in reading the text. But I was able to comprehend was the similarity of my ideas with Kirsten.

I believe, the first candidate has adopted quantitative approach along with feminist perspective. He uses methods and objective assumptions, impartial approach where he validates his ideas. But he is mindful of gender roles in social research. But I am still confuse whether there is use of Positivism approach also. It is combination of productive reasoning and then observations are the means by which knowledge of the laws of nature and society is acquired.

Second candidate has used qualitative methodology including motivations, barriers to research, decisions, experiences and choices to be made in order to carry out research. There is focus on subjective experiences and socio-cultural context which highlights the use of observations and constructivist approaches.

The third candidate positions his research on feminism, role of socio-economic context in lifelong learning. How the political, historical and social context affects women participation in economic life. The candidate uses variety of tools so I believe he may have use mixed methodology in his research. Moreover, there was emphasis on role of researcher which I think may be highlights the Pragmatism approach also. The qualitative methods includes the perspectives and power relations in society highlighting socio-cultural context of research.

The fourth candidate has focus on effectiveness of research which is mostly attach to value of research by have personal meanings and values. I think, here qualitative methods is solely used as its main focus is values, and meanings rather particular methodology adoption. So the candidate has use qualitative along with perspective from feminist theories.

I am more aligned with using mixed methodology in research because in order to carry out research we want to have interviews, questionnaires along with methodology to find out did our research was successful in getting out something useful. So, I think candidate three is more aligned with my thinking.

=====

Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Mc Ronald Ι Banderlipe - Monday, 1 February 2021, 4:48 PM

Hi Khadija,

I also tend to gravitate that mixed methods might be the balancing act for an adult education research module. I think there needs to have a deeper discussion on where a researcher reflects their positionality before identifying what approach needs to execute. I am beginning this research journey and the mere thought of creating my position makes me believe that adult education is really an interesting and an intersecting journey.

Happy to explore this conversation.

=================================

PART VI

Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Andreas Kollias - Sunday, 31 January 2021, 11:57 PM


My thoughts on this activity

...can you identify what are their assumptions and the scientific paradigms they adopt?

Candidate 1:
 "I think objectivity is a virtue for a researcher. A researcher needs to observe the object of his/her study impartially, and to select the appropriate methods and tools to check his/her hypotheses and questions in order to come to valid and reliable results that will allow him/her to understand in depth the reality...".

This candidate believes that objectivity is very important to researchers in order to be able to observe the object of their study impartially. From this I assume that this candidate believes that there is an objective social reality which is independent of each individual's consciousness. Such a belief is dominant in the positivist paradigm. Among some paradigms in the post-positivistic tradition this is also commonly accepted. Critical realism, for example, acknowledges the existence of an objective social reality. Other critical paradigms also adopt this stance when, for example, they assume that there is an objective social order, which is socially constructed (e.g. think of the objectivity of the institutional world such as the education systems), and that this reality is confronted by individuals in a manner analogous to the reality of the natural world. In brief a social order is out there, external to individuals, persistent to their reality, whether they like it or not. Feminist and marxist approaches to social research, and various theoretical approaches, frameworks or lenses informing social research, such as intersectionality, postcolonialism, etc. also accept the existence of an objective social order (e.g. power structures that create and recreate gendered, racialised, classed or other differentiations in societies that result in pervasive social injustices) which they seek to reveal, critique and ultimately change. Because however researcher objectivity in social research is a principle drawn from positivism, most likely this researcher is closer to the positivistic paradigm than other paradigms that acknowledge the existence of objective social reality. According to this tradition, researchers should distance themselves from the object of their study so the research findings are not biased from the personality, the beliefs and the values of the researcher. This view however is not accepted by researchers adopting critical or interpretivist traditions.

"Throughout my scientific career, I always follow this basic principle in my research on gender differences in continuing education ... ".
Candidate 1 offers no information on his/her particular approach or framework or worldview to the study of gender differences. In this case, the term "gender differences" indicates a research topic not an underlying research paradigm or worldview.

Candidate 2: "My research focus is on adult motivations’ to participate in LLL and the barriers inhibit adults’ participation in LLL."
The candidate just states his/her research interest on these issues (motivation and barriers), as candidate 1 stated "gender differences".  

"I am interested in understanding the ways in which individuals interpret their decisions and choices, the criteria they formulate, how they experience and evaluate their participation in education and training programs. In my research I try to highlight the subjective experiences of adults participating in LLL... ".  

Strong emphasis on qualitative research. Most likely this candidate adopts a constructivist perspective and, in terms of research strategies, a phenomenological approach.

Candidate 3: "I am particularly interested in the position of women in continuing education and lifelong learning, and especially in women coming from lower socio-economic backgrounds (unemployed, underemployed, mothers with many children, etc.). I have studied the opportunities and chances they have to improve their position in the labor market by taking advantage of typical lifelong learning education. I believe that knowledge is defined within a particular historical-political-social context and that the role of a researcher is to highlight issues with social impact and raise awareness. In my research, I try to use a variety of methods, tools, and different data sources in order to highlight multiple perspectives and power relations ..."
The terms "position" and "power relations" that this candidate uses as well as his/her reference to "particular historical-political-social contexts" makes me think that maybe he or she adopts some critical approach. The candidate most likely believes that there is an objective social order at play here which is oppressing these women. Moreover the candidate clearly views his/her role not as a mere "objective" observer of these realities (as candidate 1 does) because he or she wants to somehow change this reality through his/her research (raise awareness). Although he or she studies different groups of women coming from lower socio-economic backgrounds, there is no indication that the candidate adopts an intersectional lens. Although the candidate states that he or she tries "to use a variety of methods, tools, and different data sources" this does not mean that he or she uses mixed methods. A researcher can use a variety of methods, tools, and different data sources in a multi-method quantitative research (e.g. both survey research and quantitative content analysis of texts) or multi-method qualitative research (e.g. in-depth interviews and focus group discussions).

Candidate 4: "... The basic criterion that determines the quality of a research is its effectiveness, whether it answers the initial question(s) and/or purpose(s) set by the researcher beforehand. It is important for me to be engaged in research projects that have a personal meaning and value. In my studies I choose each time the appropriate methodology that will allow me to achieve my aims and goals. I have studied various issues, such as the profiles and career paths of people attending second chance schools, the effectiveness of different policies applied in adult education, the role of gender in choosing vocational training programs, on the job training and performance in the workplace, different definitions and understanding of the concept of continuing education, education and training in detention centers, economics of adult education, etc ... »
Well, I am not convinced that this candidate adopts pragmatism as a social research paradigm. Because the candidate states that in research not just the purpose but also the research question(s) are set by the researcher beforehand he or she is likely to adopt mainly deductive, theory-driven approaches to social research. Therefore although the candidate later states that "I choose each time the appropriate methodology" he or she is unlikely to do qualitative research because in such research the questions are seldomly stated beforehand and in any case these are open to modifications at later stages of the research. Most likely this candidate is flexible in his/her (quantitative mainly) methodological choices given also that the candidate has been involved in research in many different thematic areas and contexts. Engaging in many and sometimes thematically unrelated research projects can be  a really challenging  endeavor. Researchers sometimes engage in many different projects, some of which may not really interest them, because this is how they can get funding. Most probably he or she states that "it is important for me to be engaged in research projects that have a personal meaning and value" not because he or she is selfishly interested only about his her own personal and professional development but because in the past he or she has been engaged in projects that were not really meaningful to him/her and he or she knows how disillusioning it is to do research only because you have to pay your rent.


=====

Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Mc Ronald Ι Banderlipe - Monday, 1 February 2021, 5:18 PM

Hi Andreas,

These were useful explanations! Thanks so much. Now, I will revise my matrix and add your insights too.

In fact, the profiles of the 4 candidates were vague that it was difficult for me to assess their propensity to be involved in other types of research. You mentioned candidate number 4 to be more immersed in qualitative, but can also perform quantitative as needed. This candidate 4 prefers a research that can provide meaning (or meaningful) otherwise it may be a 'test of character'. But when reality sits in, and research as utilised for wide variety of purposes, does the researcher still have this kind of agency to decide what method to approach this endeavour? How do we deal with this kind of situation?

Sometimes, I also question the existence of research think-tanks, because they have an agenda to push, and their funding rests partly on whether their research responds to this kind of objective. I don't know really, and I can only surmise.

Thanks again for this. I will revisit my post below.

=====

PART VII

Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Francisco Jr. Bautista - Thursday, 11 February 2021, 11:01 AM


Hi McRhon,

I really do appreciate your evaluation sheet. I like the sophistication of the themes or aspects that you feel important in classifying these candidates. And yes, we share the same thought about Candidate No. II. It requires some level of "objectivity" on the part of the researcher as constructivist approaches usually "describe" rather than "explain." When the two are used interchangeably then the whole research endeavour becomes propaganda. I have a feeling though that working for think-tanks in a sense is a lot like this, which is happening in the United States!


=====

Re: Reflecting on our assumptions and beliefs in relation to social research

by Mc Ronald Ι Banderlipe - Saturday, 13 February 2021, 9:32 AM


I think so too. And therefore, I would approach this applicant's candidacy with caution. The candidate needs to identify objective qualifiers to prove an argument. In reality, this can only tap one's emotive agreement. But I am afraid we are only making conclusions based on emotive/subjective assumptions alone. I still think there must be some objectivity to be included into it.

Comments