An epistemological background of our research methods

Henri Christiaans Delft University of Technology The Netherlands h.h.c.m.christiaans@tudelft.nl In daily practice of research into the fields of engineering and design a common approach in starting a project will e to define your research methods on the asis of the research !uestion. "nd very often the choice of a method will e etween !uantitative or !ualitative or mi#ed$ without any reference to our assumptions regarding the way of understanding and interpreting how we %now what we %now. That is$ our assumptions regarding epistemology and ontology. There is a tendency among researchers to treat epistemology and method as eing synonymous. &ut in order to select the right methods for our research project we have to go ac% to these more fundamental issues or at least to e aware of underlying assumptions. 'uestions to e as%ed when starting a research project$ according to Crotty ()**+,)..hich methods do we plan to use/ 0..hich methodology defines the use of methods/ 1..hich theoretical perspective do we start from in order to apply the right methodology/ 2..hich epistemology feeds this theoretical perspective/
3pistemology o jectivism su jectivism Theoretical perspective positivism Interpretativism sym olic interactionism phenomenology hermeneutics feminism (post,modernism 4ocial5constructivism 6ethodology e#perimental descriptive survey ethnography heuristic action research discourse anal. evaluation 6ethods scaling !uestionnaires o servation interview focus group case study narratives ethnographic stat analysis data reduction cognitive mapping interpretative meth document analysis content analysis conversation anal.

The relevance of this !uestioning can e illustrated on the discussion on the !uantitative5!ualitative methods discussion. 7ver the years the choice etween !uantitative and !ualitative research paradigms have een characteri8ed y ardent disputes with purists on oth sides. The approaches are epistemologically and practically contradictory in that scientific empiricism and interpretivistic e#ploration regard each other9s central assumptions as invalid. 'uantitative purists articulate assumptions that are consistent with what is commonly called a positivist philosophy. That is$ !uantitative purists elieve that social o servations should e treated as entities in much the same way that physical scientists treat physical phenomena. They contend that the o server is separate from the entities that are su ject to o servation$ i.e. that social science in!uiry should e o jective. 'ualitative purists (also called constructivists and interpretivists, reject what they call positivism. Constructivism here refers to the form of research encompassed within the interpretativist paradigm$ constructivism eing the elief that :the %nowa le world is that of the meaning attri uted y individuals. The radical constructivist position virtually e#cludes the e#istence of an o jective world (each individual produces his own reality,.: They argue for the superiority of constructivism$ idealism$ relativism$

humanism$ hermeneutics$ and$ sometimes$ postmodernism. They claim that it is impossi le to differentiate fully causes and effects$ that logic flows from specific to general (e.g.$ e#planations are generated inductively from the data,$ and that %nower and %nown cannot e separated ecause the su jective %nower is the only source of reality.

Positivism Bealist$ singular reality Ontology 7 jectivist.Dualist (%nower can e independent of the %nown, 3#perimental. 6anipulative. DerificationCfalsification.

Constructivism Belativist. 6ultiple realities constructed y individuals. 6ultipleCHolistic 4u jectivist.Interactive. Besearcher and su ject are interdependent. Hermeneutics. 3mpathetic interaction etween researcher and su ject. Interpretation and interaction. Conte#t E time dependent wor%ing hypotheses leading to understanding.

Epistemology

Methodology

Outcomes of the research

Conte#t E time independent generalisations leading to :natural: immuta le laws or predictions.

Design Research In design research we find the same discussions regarding epistemology. The most clear opposition is that etween Her ert 4imon9s assumptions a out justified eliefs and those of Donald 4chon. 4imon9s positivist epistemology fails for 4ch;n to integrate daily life e#perience and s%ills.

References
Crotty$ 6. ()**+,. The foundations of social research. Meanings and perspectives in the research process. <ondon- 4age pu lications. =eitsch$ 6. (0>>+, Industrial design research and reflective practice (Donald 4ch;n and his lifeworld epistemology,. Department for ?roduct Design. Norwegian University of 4cience and Technology. N75 @2*) Trondheim$ Norway. martina.%eitsch@ntnu.no <ove$ T. (0>>A, " unified asis for design research and theory$ in International Design Congress - IASDR 2005 !e" Design #aradig$s $ Douliou$ Taiwan$ 0>>A. International "ssociation of 4ocieties of Design Besearch$ Taiwan.