It claims that people have their own choices and they have full liberty to express their point of view. It is totally subjective based approach. Peoples’ choices have no concerned and connection with the science laws or nature. This theory has a high validity due to a true world’s presentation. It is an utmost duty of an interpretivist to take care of peoples’ differences.
Generally, neutral question means that the question is unbiased and does not take any of the sides of the issue but the exceptions should be existed. In my opinion, “Neutral question” means not to stuck in paradigm and not coming from certain one culture. Paradigm is concept or perspective which individuals accepted. The different paradigms that people hold own would lead to different interpretation of the world in different ways. This raises a knowledge issue, “To what extent are questions within different paradigms biased because they are colored by each paradigm?” and “What knowledge can be rise from neutral question and how are they significant?” I aim to explore knowledge issues arising from the claim through making reference to and giving examples in two areas of knowledge, natural
Interpretive research is also sometimes referred to as interpretivism, qualitative research or phenomenological research. It does not rely on numerical or statistical analysis of data or evidence. Interpretivists acknowledge that their research problems exist in a social context that exists as a human construction with many attributes that cannot be quantitatively observed or measured, thus it is a reality that can only be accessed through social constructions using language, consciousness and shared meanings. Interpretive research does not predetermine dependent and independent variables but rather focuses on the involvedness of human sense-making as the circumstances emerge and thus this methodology endeavours to understand phenomena through
In analysing the discourse of any culture, the researcher must not be contended with a cultural singular lens but can also draw from other diverse cultural resources. Secondly, the researcher should strive to be holistic in theorising discourses of human cultures. This is important because one should take into account not only the present but the past as well as the future and further what to also consider through intercultural connections. This stresses the importance that the historical and intellectual dialects of discourses must be recognised at the highest
Understanding nature of science demands to identify scientific theory from hypothesis as well as scientific facts from observations (Hammer, 1994; Laudato, 2010). Epistemic knowledge empowers us to construct models, which are either representational models or mathematical models (Duschl R. , 2008). These models are vital in describing science but they are a mere depiction of the actual world. Take, for example, particle model of matter, which is a conceptualized illustration. This model depicts the limitation of Bohr model in explaining what we know about an atom and its building blocks.
It focuses on generality but fails to consider certain socio-economic features and therefore is significantly limited in explaining real world behaviour of decision makers. On the other hand, bounded rationality theory provides a more accurate view to real life human behaviour as it takes into account the constraints on the information processing capabilities of the decision maker whist still maintaining generality. Furthermore, this bounded approach to rationality uses ‘satisficing’ and ‘heuristics’ to explain real life decision making when the search for the optimal solution
Besides, the number of candidates chosen is also limited. To keep it precise and simple, the deductive approach is used. This will not set new theories or propositions, but it will definitely enhance the existing research work. This approach, however, fails to offer authenticity to the central problem of the research by limiting the sample to a single organization, thereby superseding the research progress. The verification of the data is developed on the grounds of substantiating data.
We need to use objective criteria if we want to agree on something without the will of either side. It is important to have some standards of efficiency and fairness. Referring to community practices and precedents makes the agreement “less vulnerable to attack”. Principled negotiation protects the negotiation process from a major threat – battle for
This means that realities and knowledge are confirmed through scientific and systematic investigation. In positivism studies, researchers are completely independent from the study and there are no provisions for human interests within his or her studies. According to Crowther and Lancaster (2008), as a general rule, positivist studies normally adopt deductive approach). Positivism relies on scientific evidence drawn from experiments and quantified facts which target to reflect the dynamics and picture of the social world. Positivism holds the principles of both inductive and deductive which mean that the latter tests hypotheses and the former gathers knowledge that is reached through gathering of evidence.
Constructivism is one of the aspects of interptretivism. Pragmatists utilize subjectivity and objectivity as two different positions on a continuum (Christie & Alkin, 2013). They are also of the view that inductive and deductive reasoning should be used in concert. Post positivists have the objective of “measuring truth” (Christie & Alkin, 2013). They do so despite the fact that the same objective may not be attained because all observations are imperfect and