Kirkland 1

Haylea Kirkland

Professor Childers-McKee

LBST 2215 (H)

17 September 2017

The Nuts and Bolts of Research

Even though I found myself torn after the initial introduction of this subject am not

entirely certain as to whichbetween what I would categorize my paradigm as as, however, I

would probably consider myself as having a critical theorist paradigm. Critical theorists

integrate major social sciences (i.e. geography, economics, history, sociology, psychology) in

trying to improve understanding of society. I have always been an analytical person who seeks

to understand the reasoning and history behind things and why they are the way they are.

Ever since I was little, my personality has always leaned more towards a serious,

analytical nature. I have always looked towards logic rather than emotion when faced with

anything in life, and as a result I view myself as a critical theorist. One day I hope to be a

Forensic Accountant. Accountants are very analytical and detail-oriented, much like myself.

Furthermore, my ontology would be best described as a critical realist, further

exemplifying my critical nature. Subconsciously we as humans naturally have a tendency to be

biased, even as researchers. Critical realists understand that our presence as researchers

influences what we are trying to measure. They recognize that observable actions are motivated

by unobservable actions and subconscious motives that are not always apparent. Our own

personal beliefs and experiences in life make us susceptible to skewed interpretations,

particularly in regards to conducting research. This is why Community Engaged research is so

beneficial, in addition to working with a small group of researchers with varying paradigms and
 Kirkland 2

ontologies. As a critical realist, how my perception alters my individual interpretation of

something is constantly in the back of my mind. I am always evaluating my cognitive process

and what leads me to think the way I think. As a result, I find that I am extremely critical of

myself at times and tend to consider multiple, almost opposing, interpretations of events.

My way of thinking alters my epistemology to believe that we are a part of the

knowledge of discovering or uncovering information through research. As the saying goes, there

is more than one way to skin a cat. I believe that there is more than one way to accomplish

something and by being in small research groups, we can collaborate and brainstorm

significantly more ideas than if we were to all work separately. Lastly, I believe my

methodology is best characterized as the dialectic approach. Everyone has a right to their own

opinion and views of topics, and the ability to have open discussions in differences of opinion

(backed up with reasoning, not just outlandish remarks) is vital in establishing the truth and

finding middle ground where the opposing views can agree upon.

Overall, I am an extremely critical person. My habit of analyzing things clearly shines

through in my paradigm, as well as my ontology, epistemology, and methodological approach to

research. Where I stand in terms of my paradigm gets cloudy in regards to my dialectic

approach. Since dialectics argue in support of the use of two or more paradigms, I believe that

this is where I confused found myself in arguingdisputing for the positives of multiple

paradigms. By doing so, I found difficulty when trying to determine my own paradigm.

Because my habit of extensive analyzation always comes out on top through, I was able to

accurately label myself as a critical theorist during my research of the various onesparadigms..