The Relationship Between Epistemology and Research Methods

19 Making connections: The relationship between epistemology and research methods Dawn Darlaston-Jones University of Notre Dame, Australia The ability to identify the relationship between the epistemological foundation of research and the methods employed in conducting it is critical in order for research to be truly meaningful. Unfortunately this connection is often not taught in the research methods classes that most psychology students experience. Indeed the very names of these units emphasises the focus on methods and consequently the epistemology, theoretical frameworks and methodologies that influence the choice of methods remain ‘hidden’ from view. This paper brings into focus these hidden (or often overlooked and ignored) elements of research and illustrates the importance and relevance by drawing on example from the author’s research into the student experience of higher education. The relationship between epistemology and orientation can help frame our research design. I method is rarely articulated through our formal begin by outlining the constructionist view and coursework education either at undergraduate or differentiating this from the positivist stance. I do postgraduate level; certainly this is true in many this for two reasons; first, to demonstrate the psychology programmes. Nowhere during my dominance of the positivist perspective in formal education was the connection between psychology students education and second, epistemology and method clearly explained, because I personally subscribe to a indeed the entire notion of a philosophical constructionist worldview and this influenced my foundation to research was missing. The choice of research topic, and the methodology I Australian Psychological Accreditation Council employed. Having done this I then demonstrate (APAC) guidelines do not require the how this epistemological view shaped my study epistemological foundations of science to be and was able to cast new light on the experience explicated at either the undergraduate or of undergraduate students that challenges the postgraduate level. In fact the only reference to accepted knowledge on this topic. ‘philosophy’ in the 2005 documentation is a Epistemological Roots requirement for the “history and philosophy of The basic contention of the constructionist psychology” (APAC, 2005, p.23) to be included argument is that reality is socially constructed by somewhere during the undergraduate degree. The and between the persons who experience it various research units I studied throughout my (Gergen, 1999). It is a consequence of the context undergraduate and postgraduate education were in which the action occurs and is shaped by the all titled Research Methods (with or without cultural, historical, political, and social norms various suffixes attached) which served to that operate within that context and time: And emphasise the focus onto the methods employed that reality can be different for each of us based instead of the entire construction of the research on our unique understandings of the world and process. It was only when I was struggling to our experience of it (Berger & Luckman, 1966). write my PhD thesis that I realised that this gap Reality in this case is completely subjective and in my knowledge and understanding existed and need not be something that can be shared by that I needed to rectify it before I continued with anyone else but at the same time it is independent the writing. But in embarking on this journey I of the person living it. discovered as much about me as I did about how In contrast, empiricism, which is the the methods I employed sat within a social foundation of positivism, views reality as constructionist worldview. universal, objective, and quantifiable. Therefore In this paper I will describe why it is from this perspective, it is argued that reality is important to be explicit about the epistemological the same for you as it is for me and through the foundations of our work and how identifying our application of science we can identify and ‘see’ The Australian Community Psychologist Volume 19 No 1 May 2007 Epistemology and method 20 that shared reality. By adopting the positivist in this area speaks of the role of the student in orientation, psychology has reduced the terms of motivation, commitment and ability as if individual to the status of a passive receptacle. these are isolated constructs that occur There is little notion of the person as the independently of the person or the context in perceiver of his or her world and even less which the person exists. The reality is that each thought seems to be afforded to the possibility of of us has very complex reasons for studying and the person as a conceiver or constructor of his or these decisions are influenced by the type of her world (Ashworth, 2003). Social person we are, our experiences, culture, constructionism (Berger & Luckman, 1966; background, social, and economic status. So Gergen, 1999, 2001a, 2001b) on the other hand imagine if you will a student who comes to views the individual as a sense maker in that each university from a privileged background; both of us seeks to understand or make sense of our her parents are university graduates, she attended world as we see and experience it. a well resourced high school that facilitated her The fact that science is situated within social and academic ability. She was encouraged empiricism is in fact to locate it within an by her teachers and family to explore her epistemology. Because this is the dominant potential in every area and university was discourse of science it becomes the taken-for- regarded as the natural progression in her granted norm that is above question and by postsecondary development. Contrast this extension is not subjected to critique. So while experience to the student who is the first in her science, and psychology in particular, believes family to attend university; her family and that scientific endeavour is objective and value teachers are equally supportive and encouraging free it fails to realise that these assumptions are of her achieving her potential but the nature of in fact a statement about the nature of knowledge her experience is fundamentally different from and therefore is in fact an epistemology. In the advantaged student. In the first instance the adopting the belief that a single universal reality student regards her university experience as exists for all of us and that this reality can be “more of the same” in that she is continuing a discovered via systematically controlled family tradition almost. The second student investigation science/psychology fails to though is experiencing university as a life recognise the ability of the human person to changing challenge. She sees university not interpret and make sense of his or her world. simply as a natural progression but as an Social constructionism provides a different opportunity for her to help her family and to perspective with which to view the world that become a role model for others in her allows the unique differences of individuals to neighbourhood (Ostrove, 2003; Ostrove & Cole, come into focus while at the same time 2003; Paulsen & St John, 2002; Walker, permitting the essential sameness that unites Matthew, & Black, 2004). human beings to be identified (Ashworth, 2003). These two students share the same This means that it is not necessary for any of us experience at a surface level in that they both to share the views of others but at the same time attended university from high school, they are the none of us can change or alter our reality simply same age and gender, and both are committed to because we might wish to. In this manner each completing their degree. Therefore as far as the individual reality is true for the person because attrition literature is concerned both have the he or she experiences it but it is independent of same opportunity to succeed. This position is that person due to his or her inability to alter it supported by a plethora of eminent researchers in (Gergen, 1999). the area all of whom employed quantitative Relevance to Research on Retention in Higher methodologies to examine completion and non- Education completion among undergraduate students (see To illustrate how these two worldviews for example: Abbott-Chapman, Hughes, & Wyld, differ I refer to my PhD thesis which explored 1992; Clark & Ramsay, 1990; Owen, 2003; Shah the issue of retention in higher education; why do & Burke, 1996). The approach adopted by these some students complete their undergraduate studies was to assume that students enter degree and others do not? Most of the literature university on an equal level and to track them The Australian Community Psychologist Volume 19 No 1 May 2007 Epistemology and method 21 over the course of their degree (or more whilst trying to make sense of my research commonly for the first semester or first year). A caused me several weeks of anxiety which was range of demographic data (age, ethnicity, reinforced when I was asked (by a significant gender, financial resources etc) is gathered on person) why I was discussing philosophical these students and then depending on their positions instead of focussing on psychology status at the end of the study (still enrolled, (after all I was a psychology student!). This left graduated, or withdrawn) various conclusions me in a quandary of self doubt that called into are drawn to ‘explain’ non-completion. question not only my interpretation of the data However, the realities of students are in but my whole understanding of what I was trying fact vastly different as a result of their prior to achieve with the research and the legitimacy experiences, the socialisation process they were (and therefore validity) of the approach I had subject to, and the cultural differences resulting taken. After lengthy conversations with some of from their different economic positions.

Load more