Research Paradigms

1. CONSTRUCTIONISM /CONSTRUCTIVISM

2. Sadia Butt
Iqra Mubeen
Topic: Presented By:
Constructionism

3. CONTENTS:
Presenter 1:Ms Iqra Mobeen
 Constructionism,Social constructionism
 Constructionist Design Methodologies
 (how this approach is applied in qualitative
research )
 Constructionst Methodologies
 Presenter 2:Ms Sadia Butt
 Constructionst Methodologies Con’d)
 Constructionist Qualitiative Methods
Insights on role in Qualitative Research
 Concluding Remarks

5. WHAT IS PARADIGM?
 What is a research paradigm?
 A research paradigm is “the set of common beliefs and
agreements shared between scientists about how
problems should be understood and addressed” (Kuhn,
1962)
 According to Guba (1990), research paradigms can be
characterised through their:
 ontology – What is reality?
 epistemology – How do you know something?
 methodology – How do you go about finding it out?

7. CONSTRUCTIONISM
 Constructionism is an ontological position (often also referred to as constructivism) that
asserts that social phenomena and their meanings are continually being accomplished by
social actors. It implies that social phenomena and categories are not only produced
through social interaction but that they are in a constant state of revision. Knowledge is
viewed as undetermined ( Alan Bryman,2012).
Constructionism is an epistemology embodied in many theoretical perspectives e.g sympolic
interactionsim. (Crotty, 1998).
 It is the view that all knowledge, and therefore all meaningful reality as such is contingent
upon human practices, being constructed in and out of interaction between human beings
and their world, and developed and transmitted within an essentially soical context. (Crotty,
1998).
 In constructionist view, meaning is not discovered but constructed.According to this view,
meanings are constructed by human beings as they engage with the world they are
interpreting.According to constructionsim, we do not create meaning, we construct
meaning.We have something to work with.What we have to work with is the world and
objects in the world. (Crotty, 1998).
 Constructionism mirrors the concept of intentionality.Constructionism is not subjectivism.It
is curiosity ,not conceit.

8. CONSTRUCTIONISM ( CONT’D)
 Constructionism is commonly understood to be an overarching label for
qualitative research that focuses on how social reality is ‘constructed’:
 in a given context (place and time);
 by one or more individuals (i.e. through interaction);
 under the influence of diverse and transforming conditions (e.g. meanings;
situations; goals; understandings; values, cultural practices... and so on
 In one sense or another, all qualitative research is constructionist!!

10. SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIONISM
 Origins: Social constructionism has its roots in the work of Alfred Schutz and was popularized in the US
by Peter Berger and Thomas Luckman in their 1966 book, The Social Construction of Reality.
 It is a theoretical movement that brings an alternative philosophical assumption regarding reality
construction and knowledge production. It is concerned with the ways in which knowledge is historically
situated and embedded in cultural values and practices. According to this approach, meanings are socially
constructed via the coordination of people in their various encounters; therefore, it is always fluid and
dynamic (Gergen & Gergen, 2012).
 Nature and Construction of Knowledge: Berger and Luckmann (1991) are concerned with the nature
and construction of knowledge: how it emerges and how it comes to have the significance for society.
They views knowledge as created by the interactions of individuals within society which is central to
constructionism (Schwandt, 2003).

11. SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIONISM (CONT’D)
 Realism and Relativism: It is accused of being ant-realist in denying that knowledge is a direct perception
of reality (Craib1997).It challenges the realist stance. It’s the epistemological view that all knowledge, and
therefore all meaningful reality as such is contingent upon human practices, being constructed in and out
of interaction between human beings and their world and developed and transmitted within an essentially
social context’ (Crotty, 1998).
 Social constructionism accepts that there is an objective reality. It is concerned with how knowledge is
constructed and understood. It has therefore an epistemological not an ontological perspective. (Andrews,
2012)
 Social constructionism that views society as existing both as objective and subjective reality is fully
compatible with classical grounded theory, unlike constructionist grounded theory which takes a relativist
position. Relativism is not compatible
 with classical grounded theory. Social constructionism as influence by Berger and Luckman makes no
ontological claims. Therefore choosing constructionist
 grounded theory based on the ontological assumptions of the researcher seems incompatible with the
idea of social constructionism. (Andrews, 2012)

12. SOCIAL CONSTRUTIONISM
Researcher Researcher is part of what is observed
Explanation Aim to increase understanding of the situation
Research through Gathering rich data and induction, sense-making
Concepts Should derive from stakeholders ( or include their perspective )
Unit of Analysis Should include the complexity of the whole situation
Generalization through Theoretical abstraction
Sampling approach Selection of cases for specific reasons
Table Source: Adapted from Easterbury-Smith et al. ( 2002)

14. CONSTRUCTIVISM/CONSTRUCTIONISM: METHODOLOGY:
HOW THIS APPROACH IS APPLIED IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
 What makes a particular research method `constructivist‘ or `social constructionist' in
orientation?
The answer lies less in the method or technique itself than in the philosophy with which
the technique is used. For example, an interview can be conducted to count the number of
positive self-statements in the interviewee's verbal output, or to classify him or her
according to some extant diagnostic system. However different these aims might be from
one another, both could be considered to express traditional research goals associated with
applying or creating universally `true' or valid categories for human experience.
 More specifically, a research method might be classified as constructivist or social
constructionist to the extent that it:
(a) elucidates `local' as opposed to ‘universal' meanings and practices,
(b) focuses upon provisional rather than `essential' patterns of meaning construction,
(c) considers knowledge to be the production of social and personal processes of meaning
making, and
(d) is more concerned with the viability or pragmatic utility of its application than with its
validity per se.
For example , analysis of narrative processes in spoken or written `text,' and discourse
analysis can be applied.

15. CONSTRUCTIONISM
Assumptions Constructionist /Constructivism
1. Ontology :
What is reality?
There is no single reality or truth, reality is created by
individuals in groups ( less realist ); socially constructed
; multiple holistic; contextual
2.Epistemology:
How we know what we know?
Therefore, reality needs to be interpreted. It is used to
discover the underlying meaning of events and
activities.
3.Theoretical perspective:
Which approach do you use to
know something
Interpretivism (reality needs to be interpreted)
Phenomenology
Symbolic Interactionism
Hermeneutics
Critical inquiry
Feminism
Postmodernism etc

16. CONSTRUCTIONISM/COSNTRUCTIVISM (CONT’D)
Assumptions Constructionist /Constructivism (C ) /
interpretive
4.Methodology:
How do you go about finding
out?
Ethnography
Grounded theory
Phenomenological research
Heuristic inquiry
Action Research
Discourse Analysis
5. Methods:
What techniques do you use to
find out
Usually “QUALITATIVE” could include:
interview
Observation:
Participant
Non participant
Case Study
Life History
Narrative
Theme identification
Table Source: Crotty ( 1998)

17. CONSTRUCTIONSIM:RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES

18. CONSTRUCTIVIST /CONSTRUCTIONIST “QUALITIATIVE DESIGNS
Methodologies Grounded theory
is a design of inquiry from sociology in which the researcher derives
a general, abstract theory of a process, action, or interaction
grounded in the views of participants. This process involves using
multiple stages of data collection and the refinement and inter-
relationship of categories of information (Charmaz, 2006; Corbin &
Strauss, 2007).
Central feature: Building of theory through specific analytic procedures
Formulation of
research question(s):
No standard templates. Depends on overarching methodology
Main purpose
(axiology):
Theorizing from collected data using a highly formalized coding
process (open coding; axial coding; selective coding). Iterating
between theory and data using this process until a coherent theory
emerges.
Levels of analysis: Middle-range (not the individual level nor the societal level but meso
level, that which is in-between, ‘specific social phenomenon’ e.g. sub
cultural practice of ‘skateboarding’
Methodology: induction; deduction and (abduction), or, constructivist abduction
Methods: creating a tentative model for directing coding; data-collection;
coding; creating categories; constant comparison; theoretical
saturation; integration of theory

19. CONSTRUCTIVIST /CONSTRUCTIONIST “QUALITIATIVE DESIGNS (CONT’D)
Methodologies Ethnography
Ethnography is a strategy of inquiry in which the researcher
studies an intact cultural group in a natural setting over a
prolonged period of time by collecting, primarily, observational
and interview data (Creswell, 2007b). The research process is
flexible and typically evolves contextually in response to the lived
realities encountered in the field setting (LeCompte & Schensul,
1999).
Data collection often involves observations and interviews.
Central feature / Purpose: Study of cultures and cultural sense-making through different
forms of observation in actual situations; Study cultural
phenomena in natural setting
Main purpose (axiology): Understanding daily life from the ‘inside’ (from the ‘natives’
perspective)
Formulation of research
question(s)
No standard templates. Often asks how a given culture or
cultural context is structured and enacted through cultural
practices (e.g. habits; routines; rituals; norms; actions; values,
beliefs...)

20. ETHNOGRAPHY ( CONT’D)
Methodologies Ethnography (Conr’d)
Levels of analysis: Traditionally ‘emic’ (the individual’s point of view) – but
in contemporary cases extending to the etic
(interpretation of individual practices against broader
cultural or historical context
Methodology (multiple): constructionist; interpretive; hermeneutic; constructivist;
cultural
Methods (multiple): participant or non-participant observation; interviewing;
field notes; photography; videography; analysis of
secondary documents etc.

21. CONSTRUCTIVIST /CONSTRUCTIONIST “QUALITIATIVE DESIGNS ()
Methodologies Phenomenological research
is a design of inquiry coming from philosophy and
psychology in which the researcher describes the
lived experiences of individuals about a
phenomenon as described by participants. This
description culminates in the essence of the
experiences for several individuals who have all
experienced the phenomenon. This design has
strong philosophical underpinnings and typically
involves conducting interviews (Giorgi, 2009;
Moustakas, 1994).
Purpose is to identify phenomena as perceived by study
participants
Analysis level The meaning, structure, and essence of the lived
experience?
Investigation /Iquiry Direct investigation and description of
phenomenon
without a priori theories
Derviatives Has many derivatives such as phenomenological
hurestic inquiry

22. CONSTRUCTIVIST /CONSTRUCTIONIST “QUALITIATIVE DESIGNS
Methodologies Discourse Analysis
Philosophically based on social constructivism
- John Austin: descriptive and performative speech acts (How to do
things with words, 1962)
- Michel Foucault: discourses, power-knowledge relationships
(Archaeology of Knowledge, 1969)
is the study of how stretches of language used in communication
assume meaning,purpose and unity for their users: the quality of
coherence ( Encyclopedic dictionary of applied linguistic by Keith
Johnson & Helen Johnson,1998)
Central feature: Understanding how people are conditioned by discourse. ‘Discourse’
provides the vocabulary, expressions, and style of thinking and talking
about a given subject. Thus, discourse also reproduces cultural
meanings
Formulation of
research
question(s):
Following the constructivist methodology, appropriate research
questions ask: How do people talk about so and so...?’ What kinds of
discourses are prevalent in context Y?

23. CONSTRUCTIVIST /CONSTRUCTIONIST “QUALITIATIVE DESIGNS (CONT’D)
Methodologies Discourse Analysis (Cont’d)
Main purpose
(axiology):
Multiple, e.g. understanding how discourse creates ‘truth’,
‘legitimacy’, power relations, self-surveillance (Foucaldian
discourse analysis), or, how discourses are historically and/or
culturally specific, moulding particular forms of marketplace and
practices therein (e.g. Craig Thompson’s consumer research
studies
Levels of
analysis:
individual; group; community; institutional; societal; mythic
Methodology: constructivism; interpretivism (i.e. hermeneutics)
Methods : interviews; focus groups; different kinds of ‘text’ (media;
commercial; legal; political; ethnographic etc.); grounded
theory; analysis of narrative

24. CONSTRUCTIVIST /CONSTRUCTIONIST “QUALITIATIVE DESIGNS
Methodedology Action Research
Central feature: Close collaboration with the research object/subject (a group,
community or organization), solving practical problems as part of the
research process
Formulation of
research question(s):
Formulated to address practical problems, e.g. How to market
Valio’s dairy products in the Russian market?
Main purpose
(axiology):
Researchers perform as outside facilitators of change, fostering
reflection over the change, while also doing a specific case study or
set of studies
Levels of analysis: middle-range (meso); macro
Methodology: constructionist; constructivist (but can be also realist)
Methods (multiple): ethnography; focus groups; interviewing; action-experiments;
participant-written cases and narrative

25. CONSTRUCTIONISM /CONSTRUCTAVISM “QUALITIATIVE METHODS

26. CONSTRUCTIVIST /CONSTRUCTIONIST “QUALITIATIVE DESIGNS (CONT’D)
Methods Case Research
• Case studies are a strategy of inquiry in which the
researcher explores in depth a program, event,
activity, process, or one or more individuals. Cases
are bounded by time and activity, and researchers
collect detailed information using a variety of data
collection procedures over a sustained period of time
(Stake, 1995).
Central feature: the construction of a ‘case(s) (bounded real-life
context)
Formulating research
question(s):
always related to the understanding and solving of the
case
Main purpose (axiology): investigating the case ‘holistically’ in relation to its
historical, economic, technological, social and cultural
context (and to grasp what is ‘intrinsic’ about this
particular case)

27. CONSTRUCTIVIST /CONSTRUCTIONIST “QUALITIATIVE DESIGNS (CONT’D)
Methods Case Research (Cont’d)
Levels of analysis may include the individual actor or group of actors (e.g.
focus on lived experiences/narratives), or an on-going
process such as a management project (e.g. focus on
development of normative management practices over
a certain period of time)
Methodology (multiple): constructionist; interpretive; hermeneutic; constructivist;
cultural (but often just ‘realist’)
Methods (multiple): ethnography; interviewing; grounded theory; analysis of
texts etc.

28. CONSTRUCTIVIST /CONSTRUCTIONIST “QUALITIATIVE DESIGNS (CONT’D)
Methods Narrative Research
Narrative research is a strategy of inquiry in which the
researcher studies the lives of
individuals and asks one or more individuals to provide
stories about their lives. This
information is then often retold or restoried by the
researcher into a narrative chronology. In the end, the
narrative combines views from the participant’s life with
those of the researcher’s life in a collaborative narrative
(Clandinin & Connelly, 2000).
Central feature : Studying how people tell stories and through such story-
telling construct their selves, reality, interpreting and
understanding shared meanings
Formulation of research
question(s):
Following the constructivist methodology, appropriate
research questions ask: ‘How do people tell stories about
so and so...

29. CONSTRUCTIVIST /CONSTRUCTIONIST “QUALITIATIVE DESIGNS (CONT’D)
Methods Narrative Research (Cont’d)
Main purpose (axiology): Understanding how sense-making happens through story-
telling (self; identity; life-story; narrative coping techniques;
structural analyses)
Methodology: constructionist; interpretive; constructivist (but also realist,
postmodern and post-structural)
Methods: narrative analysis; analysis of narrative; antenarrative analysis

30. CONSTRUCTIVIST /CONSTRUCTIONIST “QUALITIATIVE DESIGNS (CONT’D)
Methods Focus Group
Central feature: A group of individuals discuss together, through their personal
experiences, a topic selected by the researcher
Formulation of research
question(s):
Following the constructivist paradigm, appropriate research
questions ask, for example, “how do consumers talk about
Colgate toothpaste (if it were a focus group on this product)”
Main purpose (axiology): Understanding how people interact with one another and
construct meanings together. Understanding interactional
dynamics of various kinds
Levels of analysis: Social; group level
Methodology: Constructivist (when academic); realist (when done for business
purposes)
Methods: planning of group compilation; recruitment; group facilitation;
content-analysis/ethnography

31. CONSTRUCTIVIST /CONSTRUCTIONIST “QUALITIATIVE DESIGNS (CONT’D)
Methods Observations
the same kinds of critical points easy to identify as in all
empiricalresearch the researcher has to go to the field,
contact informants and collect data
How to access setting? The setting may be open or closed. Access may be
done openly or secretly.
Which role for the
researcher?
Complete participant (covert observer, fully functioning
member)
- Participant-as-observer (overt observer, engaged in
regular
practices)
- Observer-as-participant (the researcher mainly as an
interviewer,
only following the practices)
- Complete observer (no interaction with the people,
unobtrusive
observation)
==> Typically the role changes during the research and
the
researcher has to be able to do reasonable decisions

32. INSIGHTS OF ROLE IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
 Constructionists thinking and reasoning have played a major role in psychology for several years;
 In modern cognitive psychology constructivist principles and concepts are the basic elements of
research, especially in the ®elds of learning, language and memory.
 Rumelhart (1980) analyses cognition as an interpretation process controlled by cognitive schemes.
Johnson et al. (1999) examines the construction
 of mental models for `extensional reasoning‘ of `naive individuals.' Constructivist principles and
concepts are also relevant for scientific knowledge
 because `knowledge of all kinds, including scientific knowledge, is a construction of the human mind‘
(Scarr 1985, p. 499).
 The concept that all knowledge and thinking is a result of construction is certainly
 the core assumption of all versions of scientific constructionism.
 Furthermore, social constructionism blurs the division between intervention and inquiry, inviting the
professional to become an integral practitioner researcher. This stance toward intervention and
knowledge production can help organizations to coordinate a collective process of collaboration
among stakeholders, to reflexively and critically create knowledge that helps in understanding the
organizational system and the process of change promoted by an intervention. (Borges & Rasera,
2013)

33. CONCLUDING REMARKS
 In conclusion, the social constructionist theory together with its
resources brings a fresh approach to organizational development
where the focus is on people generating meaning together to create
their organizational worlds. In that sense, it sustains the assumption
that organizations can change their culture by changing the
conversation, by putting people together to dialogue and to co-
create possibilities for action generating new possible realities
(Borges & Rasera, 2013).