Interpretivism Paradigm & Research Philosophy

Interpretivism Paradigm & Research Philosophy 26/06/24, 12:03 PM
Interpretivism Paradigm &

Research Philosophy
simplypsychology.org/interpretivism-paradigm.html
The interpretivist paradigm is a research approach in sociology that

focuses on understanding the subjective meanings and experiences
of individuals within their social context.
INTERPRETIV
Interpretivismisasocialscience
emphasizingunderstandingpheno
Key Takeaways
THEORY
Interpretivism is an approach to social science that asserts that
•Subjectivity:realityissubjectiveand
understanding the beliefs, motivations, and reasoning of individuals
in a social situation is essential to decoding the meaning of the data
multiple,constructedandinterpretedby
that can be collected around a phenomenon.
individualsbasedontheirexperiences
•Understanding(Verstehen):social
https://cdn.printfriendly.com/assets/client/algo-c69e33b3d805e00e40e08e7a84981a93652cc77bb64ce43cbf065781348bf488.html Page 1 of 16
•Understanding(Verstehen):social
There are numerous interpretivist approaches to sociology, three of
scienceaimstounderstandsocial
the most influential of which are hermeneutics, phenomenology and
ethnomethodology, and symbolic interactionism.
phenomenafromtheperspectiveoftho
Sociologists who have adopted an interpretivists approach include
involved,nottopredictorcontrolit.
Weber, Garfinkle, Bulmer, Goffman, Cooley, Mead, and Husser.
Interpretivists use both qualitative and quantitative research
methods. However, they believe that there is no one “right path” to
knowledge, thus rejecting the idea that there is one methodology that
SIMPLY
will consistently get at the “truth” of a phenomenon.
Interpretivist approaches to research differ from positivist ones in
their emphasis on qualitative data and focus on context.
The Interpretivist Paradigm
Interpretivism uses qualitative research methods that focus

on individuals” beliefs, motivations, and reasoning over
quantitative data to gain understanding of social
interactions.
Interpretivists assume that access to reality happens

through social constructions such as language,
consciousness, shared meanings, and instruments (Myers,
2008).
What is a Paradigm?
A paradigm is a set of ideas and beliefs which provide a framework or

model which research can follow. A paradigm defines existing knowledge,
the nature of the problem(s) to be investigated, appropriate methods of
investigation, and the way data should be analyzed and interpreted.
The interpretivist paradigm developed as a critique of positivism in the

social sciences
Interpretivism has its roots in idealistic philosophy. The umbrella term has
also been used to group together schools of thought ranging from social
constructivism to phenomenology and hermeneutics: approaches that
reject the view that meaning exists in the world independently of people”s
consciousness and interpretation.
Because meaning exists through the lens of people, interpretivist

approaches to social science consider it important for researchers to
appreciate the differences between people, and seek to understand how
these differences inform how people find meaning.
The Interpretivist Assumptions
The interpretive approach is based on the following

assumptions:
Human life can only be understood from within
According to interpretivism, individuals have consciousness. This means

that they are not merely coerced puppets that react to social forces in the
way that positivists mean. This has the result that people in a society are
intricate and complex.
Different people in a society experience and understand the same

“objective” reality in different ways, and have individual reasons for their
actions (Alharahshel & Pius, 2020; Bhattacherjee, 2012).
This more sense-based approach of interpretivism to research has roots in

anthropology, sociology, psychology, linguistics, and semiotics, and has
been used since the early 19th century, long before the development of
positivist sociology.
The social world does not “exist” independently of human

knowledge
Interpretivists do not deny that there is an external reality. However, they

do not accept that there is an independently knowable reality.
Contrary to positivist approaches to sociology, interpretivists assert that all

research is influenced and shaped by the pre-existing theories and
worldviews of the researchers.
Terms, procedures, and data used in research have meaning because a

group of academics have agreed that these things have meaning. This
makes research a socially constructed activity, which means phenomena is
created by society and not naturally occurring. It will vary from culture to
culture.
Consequently, the reality that research tells us is also socially constructed

(Alharahshel & Pius, 2020).
Research should be based on qualitative methods
Interpretivists also use a broad range of qualitative methods. They also

accept reflective discussions of how researchers do research, considering
these to be prized sources of knowledge and understanding.
This is in contrast to post positivists, who generally consider their

reflections and personal stories of researchers to be unacceptable as
research because they are neither scientific nor objective (Smith, 1993).
The term interpretive research is often used synonymously with qualitative

research, but the two concepts are different. Interpretive research is a
research paradigm, or set of common beliefs and agreements shared
between scientists about how problems should be understood and
addressed (Kuhn, 1970).
Because interpretivists see social reality as embedded within and

impossible to abstract from their social settings, they attempt to make
“sense” of reality rather than testing hypotheses.
Research should be based on a grounded

theory
There can be causal explanation in sociology but there is no need for a

hypothesis before starting research. By stating an hypothesis at the start of
the study Glaser and Strauss argue that researchers run the risk of
imposing their own views on the data rather than those of the actors being
researched.
Instead, there should be a grounded theory which means allowing ideas to

emerge as the data is collected which
can later be used to produce a testable hypothesis.
Research Design
Interpretivists believe that there is no particular right or

correct path to knowledge, and no special method that
automatically leads to intellectual progress (Smith, 1993).
This means that interpretivists are antifoundationalists.
Interpretivists, however, accept that there are standards that guide

research. However, they believe that these standards cannot be universal.
Instead, interpretivists believe that research standards are the products of
a particular group or culture
Interpretivists do not always abandon standards such as the rules of the

scientific method; they simply accept that whatever standards are used are
subjective, and potentially able to fail, rather than objective and universal
(Smith, 1993).
Qualitative Methods
Qualitative data is virtually any type of information that can be observed

and recorded, not numerical, and can be in the form of written or verbal
communication.
Interpretivists can collect qualitative data using a variety of techniques. The

most frequent of these is interviews. These can manifest in many forms,
such as face-to-face, over the telephone, or focus groups. Another
technique for interpretivist data collection is observation.
Observation can include direct observation, a technique common to case

research where the researcher is a neutral and passive external observer
and is not involved in the phenomena that they are studying.
Interpretivists can also use documentation as a data collecting technique,

collecting external and internal documents, such as memos, emails,
annual reports, financial statements, newspaper articles, websites, and so
on, to cast further insight into a phenomenon of interest or to corroborate
other forms of evidence (Smith, 1993).
Case Research
Case research is an intensive, longitudinal study of a phenomenon at least

one research site that intends to derive detailed, contextualized inferences
and understand the dynamics that underlie the phenomenon that is being
studied.
In this research design, the case researcher is a neutral observer, rather

than an active participant. In the end, drawing meaningful inferences from
case research largely depends on the observational skills and integrative
abilities of the research (Schwartz-Shea & Yanow, 2013).
Action Research
Action research, meanwhile, is a qualitative albeit positivist research

design aimed at testing, rather than building theories.
Action research designs interaction, assuming that complex social

phenomena are best understood by introducing changes, interventions, or
“Actions” into the phenomena being studied and observing the outcomes
of such actions on that phenomena.
Usually, the researcher in this method is a consultant or organizational

member embedded into a social context who initiates an action in
response to a social problem, and examines how their action influences
the phenomenon while also learning and generating insights about the
relationship between the action and the phenomenon.
Some examples of actions may include organizational changes, such as

through introducing people or technology, initiated with the goal of
improving an organization”s performance or profitability as a business.
The researcher”s choice of actions may be based on theory which explains

why and how certain actions could bring forth desired social changes
(Schwartz-Shea & Yanow, 2013).
Interpretivist Sociological Perspectives
There are three major interpretivist approaches to sociology

(Williams, 2000):
1. Hermeneutics, which refers to the philosophy of interpretation and

understanding. Often, Hermeneutics focuses on influential, ancient
texts, such as scripture.
2. Phenomenology and Ethnomethodology, which is a philosophical

tradition that seeks to understand the world through directly
experiencing the phenomena within it. Ethnomethodology, which has
a phenomenological foundation, is the study of how people make
sense of and navigate their everyday world through norms and
rituals.
3. Symbolic interaction, which accepts symbols as culturally derived

social objects that have shared meanings. These symbols provide a
means to construct reality.
Hermeneutics
Originally, the term hermeneutics referred exclusively to the study of

sacred texts such as the Talmud or the Bible.
Hermeneuticists originally used various methods to get at the meaning of

these texts, such as through studying the meaning of terms and phrases
from the document in other writings from the same era, the social and
political context in which the passage was written, and the way the
concepts discussed are used in other parts of the document (Williams,
2000).
Gradually, however, hermeneutics expanded beyond this original meaning

to include understanding human action in context.
There are many variations on hermeneutics; however, Smith (1991)

concluded that they all share two characteristics in common:
1. An emphasis on the importance of language in understanding,

because language can both limit and make possible what people can
say,
2. An emphasis on the context, particularly the historical one, as a

frame for understanding, because human behavior and ideas must
be understood in context, rather than in isolation.
Hermeneutics has several different subcategories, including validation,

critical, and philosophical. The first of these, validation, is based on post
positivism and assumes that hermeneutics can be a scientific way to find
the truth.
Critical hermeneutics is focused on critical theory, and aims to highlight the

historical conditions that lead to oppression.
Finally, philosophical hermeneutics aims to develop understanding and

rejects the idea that there is a certain research method that will uncover
the truth without fail (Smith, 1991).
Phenomenology
Phenomenology is a type of social action theory that focuses on studying

people’s perceptions of the world.
Understanding different perspectives often call for different methods of

research and different ways of reporting results. Research methods that
attempt to examine the subjective perceptions of the person being studied
are often called phenomenological research methods.
Interpretivists generally tend to use qualitative methods such as case

studies and ethnography, writing reports that are rich in detail in order to
depict the context needed for understanding.
Ethnography
Ethnography, a research method derived largely from anthropology,

emphasizes studying a phenomenon within the context of its culture.
In practice, an ethnographic researcher must immerse themself into a

social culture over an extended period of time and engage, observe, and
record the daily life of the culture being studied and its social participants
within their natural setting.
In addition, ethnographic researchers must take extensive field notes and

narrate their experience in descriptive detail so that readers can
experience the same culture as the researcher.
This gives the researcher two roles: relying on their unique knowledge and
engagement to generate insights, and convincing the scientific community
that this behavior applies across different situations (Schwandt, 1994).
Symbolic Interactionism
Symbolic interactionism starts which the assumptions that humans inhabit

a symbolic world, in which symbols, such as language, have a shared
meaning.
The social world is therefore constructed by the meaning that individual

attach to events and phenomena and these are transmitted across
generations through language.
A central concept of symbolic interactionism is the Self, which allows

individuals to calculate the effects of their actions.
Interpretivist Research Designs

Interpretivists can collect qualitative data using a variety of techniques. The
most frequent of these are interviews. These can manifest in many forms,
such as face-to-face, over the telephone, or in focus groups.
Another technique for interpretivist data collection is observation.

Observation can include direct observation, a technique common to case
research where the researcher is a neutral and passive external observer
and is not involved in the phenomena that they are studying.
Thirdly, interpretivists can use documentation as a data collecting

technique, collecting external and internal documents, such as memos,
emails, annual reports, financial statements, newspaper articles, websites,
and so on — to cast further insight into a phenomenon of interest or to
corroborate other forms of evidence (Smith, 1993).
Case Research
Case research is an intensive, longitudinal study of a phenomenon at least

one research site that intends to derive detailed, contextualized inferences
and understand the dynamics that underlie the phenomenon that is being
studied.
In this research design, the case researcher is a neutral observer, rather

than an active participant. In the end, drawing meaningful inferences from
case research largely depends on the observational skills and integrative
abilities of the research (Schwartz-Shea & Yanow, 2013).
Action Research
Action research, meanwhile, is a qualitative albeit positivist research

design aimed at testing, rather than building theories.
Action research designs interaction, assuming that complex social

phenomena are best understood by introducing changes, interventions, or
“Actions” into the phenomena being studied and observing the outcomes
of such actions on that phenomena.
Usually, the researcher in this method is a consultant or organizational

member embedded into a social context who initiates an action in
response to a social problem, and examines how their action influences
the phenomenon while also learning and generating insights about the
relationship between the action and the phenomenon.
Some examples of actions may include organizational changes, such as

through introducing people or technology, initiated with the goal of
improving an organization’s performance or profitability as a business.
The researcher”s choice of actions may be based on theory which explains

why and how certain actions could bring forth desired social changes
(Schwartz-Shea & Yanow, 2013).
Examples of Interpretive Research
Decision Making in Businesses
Although interpretive research tends to rely heavily on qualitative data,

quantitative data can add more precision and create a clearer
understanding of the phenomenon being studied than qualitative data.
For example, Eisenhardt (1989) conducted an interpretive study of

decision-making in high-velocity firms.
Eisenhardt collected numerical data on how long it took each firm to make
certain strategic decisions (ranging from 1.5 months to 18 months), how
many decision alternatives were considered for each decision, and
surveyed her respondents to capture their perceptions of organizational
conflict.
This numerical data helped Eisenhardt to clearly distinguish high-speed

decision making firms from low-speed decision makers without relying on
respondents” subjective perceptions.
This differentiation then allowed Eisenhardt to examine the number of

decision alternatives considered by and the extent of conflict in high-speed
and low-speed firms.
Eisenhardt”s study is one example of how interpretivist researchers can

use a mixture of quantitative and qualitative data to study their phenomena
of interest.
Teaching and Technology
Waxman and Huang (1996) conducted an interpretivist study on the

relationship between computers and teaching strategies.
While positivists and post positivists may use the data from that study to
make a general statement about the relationship between computers and
teaching strategies, interpretivists would argue that the context of the study
could alter this general conclusion entirely.
For example, Waxman and Huang (1996) mention in their paper that the
school district where the data were collected had provided training for
teachers that emphasized the use of “constructivist” approaches to
teaching and learning.
This training may mean that the study would have generated different
results in a school district where teachers were provided extensive training
on a different teaching method.
Interpretivists are concerned about how data are situated, and how this
context can affect the data.
Interpretivism vs. Positivism
Whereas positivism looks for universals based on data,

interpretivism looks for an understanding of a particular
context, because this context is critical to interpreting the
data gathered.
Generally, interpretivist research is prepared to sacrifice reliability and

representativeness for greater validity while positivism requires research to
be valid, reliable, and representative.
While a positivist may use largely quantitative research methods, official

statistics, social surveys, questionnaires, and structured interviews to
conduct research, interpretivists may rely on qualitative methods, such as
personal documents, participant observation, and unstructured interviews
(Alharahshel & Pius, 2020; Bhattacherjee, 2012).
Interprevists and positivists also differ in how they see the relationship
between the society and the individual. Positivists believe that society
shapes the individual, and that society consists of “social facts” that
exercise coercive control over individuals.
This means that people”s actions can generally be explained by the social
norms that they have been exposed to through socialization, social class,
gender, and ethnic background.
Many positivist researchers view interpretive research as erroneous and

biased, given the subjective nature of qualitative data collection and the
process of interpretation used in such research.
However, the failure of many positivist techniques to generate insights has

resulted in a resurgence of interest in interpretive research since the
1970s, now informed with exacting methods and criteria to ensure the
reliability and validity of interpretive inferences (Bhattacherjee, 2012).
References
Alharahsheh, H. H., & Pius, A. (2020). A review of key paradigms:

Positivism VS interpretivism. Global Academic Journal of Humanities and
Social Sciences, 2 (3), 39-43.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2012). Social science research: Principles, methods,

and practices. University of South Florida.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Making fast strategic decisions in high-velocity

environments. Academy of Management Journal, 32 (3), 543-576.
Goldkuhl, G. (2012). Pragmatism vs interpretivism in qualitative information

systems research. European journal of information systems, 21 (2), 135-
146.
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). Criticism and the growth of knowledge: Volume 4:

Proceedings of the International Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science,
London, 1965 (Vol. 4). Cambridge University Press.
Myers, M. D. (2008). Qualitative Research in Business & Management.

SAGE Publications.
Schwandt, T. A. (1994). Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human

inquiry. Handbook of qualitative research, 1 (1994), 118-137.
Schwartz-Shea, P., & Yanow, D. (2013). Interpretive research design:

Concepts and processes. Routledge.
Smith, D. G. (1991). Hermeneutic inquiry: The hermeneutic imagination

and the pedagogic text. Forms of curriculum inquiry, 3.
Smith, J. K. (1993). After the demise of empiricism: The problem of judging

social and education inquiry.
Waxman, H. C., & Huang, S. Y. L. (1996). Classroom instruction

differences by level of technology use in middle school mathematics.
Journal of Educational Computing Research, 14 (2), 157-169.
Walsham, G. (1995). The emergence of interpretivism in IS research.

Information systems research, 6 (4), 376-394.
Williams, M. (2000). Interpretivism and generalisation. Sociology, 34 (2),

209-224.
© 2024 Simply Psychology

Interpretivism Paradigm &amp; Research Philosophy

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Interpretivism Paradigm &amp; Research Philosophy

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Interpretivism Paradigm & Research Philosophy 26/06/24, 12:03 PM

Interpretivism Paradigm &

The interpretivist paradigm is a research approach in sociology that

The Interpretivist Paradigm

Interpretivism uses qualitative research methods that focus

Interpretivists assume that access to reality happens

A paradigm is a set of ideas and beliefs which provide a framework or

The interpretivist paradigm developed as a critique of positivism in the

Because meaning exists through the lens of people, interpretivist

The Interpretivist Assumptions

The interpretive approach is based on the following

Human life can only be understood from within

According to interpretivism, individuals have consciousness. This means

Different people in a society experience and understand the same

This more sense-based approach of interpretivism to research has roots in

The social world does not “exist” independently of human

Interpretivists do not deny that there is an external reality. However, they

Contrary to positivist approaches to sociology, interpretivists assert that all

Terms, procedures, and data used in research have meaning because a

Consequently, the reality that research tells us is also socially constructed

Research should be based on qualitative methods

Interpretivists also use a broad range of qualitative methods. They also

This is in contrast to post positivists, who generally consider their

The term interpretive research is often used synonymously with qualitative

Because interpretivists see social reality as embedded within and

Research should be based on a grounded

There can be causal explanation in sociology but there is no need for a

Instead, there should be a grounded theory which means allowing ideas to

Interpretivists believe that there is no particular right or

Interpretivists, however, accept that there are standards that guide

Interpretivists do not always abandon standards such as the rules of the

Qualitative data is virtually any type of information that can be observed

Interpretivists can collect qualitative data using a variety of techniques. The

technique for interpretivist data collection is observation.

Observation can include direct observation, a technique common to case

Interpretivists can also use documentation as a data collecting technique,

Case research is an intensive, longitudinal study of a phenomenon at least

In this research design, the case researcher is a neutral observer, rather

Action research, meanwhile, is a qualitative albeit positivist research

Action research designs interaction, assuming that complex social

Usually, the researcher in this method is a consultant or organizational

Some examples of actions may include organizational changes, such as

The researcher”s choice of actions may be based on theory which explains

Interpretivist Sociological Perspectives

There are three major interpretivist approaches to sociology

1. Hermeneutics, which refers to the philosophy of interpretation and

2. Phenomenology and Ethnomethodology, which is a philosophical

3. Symbolic interaction, which accepts symbols as culturally derived

Originally, the term hermeneutics referred exclusively to the study of

Hermeneuticists originally used various methods to get at the meaning of

Gradually, however, hermeneutics expanded beyond this original meaning

There are many variations on hermeneutics; however, Smith (1991)

1. An emphasis on the importance of language in understanding,

2. An emphasis on the context, particularly the historical one, as a

Hermeneutics has several different subcategories, including validation,

Critical hermeneutics is focused on critical theory, and aims to highlight the

Finally, philosophical hermeneutics aims to develop understanding and

Phenomenology is a type of social action theory that focuses on studying

Understanding different perspectives often call for different methods of

Interpretivists generally tend to use qualitative methods such as case

Ethnography, a research method derived largely from anthropology,

In practice, an ethnographic researcher must immerse themself into a

In addition, ethnographic researchers must take extensive field notes and

Symbolic interactionism starts which the assumptions that humans inhabit

Interpretivism Paradigm & Research Philosophy

Interpretivism Paradigm & Research Philosophy