The qualitative research process is a multifaceted sequence of scientific decision-making that predetermines the overall approach to the issue under investigation and the outcomes of a study. The choice of epistemological, ontological, and methodological paradigms significantly influences and often limits the scope of possible tools for conducting research according to the planned aims and goals. Therefore, unlike in quantitative research, in qualitative inquiry, a researcher’s preference for particular approaches might hinder the objectivity of the findings and impose a higher risk for bias. However, the awareness of such characteristic features of the qualitative research process and the influential role of the researcher’s positionality allows for predicting the bias and addressing it effectively for more reliability and credibility of the research. In this researcher lense paper, I will introduce the epistemological and ontological paradigms I prefer to use in my qualitative research and the anticipated ways the alignment with them might affect the issues under investigation and research findings.
Within the perspective of epistemological paradigm choices, a researcher is commonly inclined to one way of assuming knowledge or another. According to Walliman (2011), epistemology is “the theory of knowledge, especially about its validation and the methods used” (p. 16). Among the options available among the epistemological paradigms, I am most aligned with constructivism since it provides an opportunity for integrating one’s experience into the research. As defined by Dezin and Lincoln (2013), constructivism falls under the category of relativist ontological paradigm and subjectivist epistemological paradigm, which address “local and specific constructed and co-constructed realities” as well as “created findings” (p. 202). Therefore, constructivism is a paradigm that relies on individual constructions when defining the nature of knowledge, which particularly resonates with my vision of proper conducting of qualitative research.
In particular, the choice of constructivist grounded theory as a preferred theoretical perspective aligns with my research lens. Since constructivism is inductive and necessitates an individual’s active participation in interpreting the investigated phenomena, the grounded theory complements the methodological opportunities and allows for researching the changes in a phenomenon under the influence of the altered conditions. Overall, as stated by Willis (2007), qualitative research is particularly dependent on the inquirer’s perspective because one is “devoted to a particular research method, it is often because that method is an expression of their paradigm” (p. 147). Thus, my preference for constructivist grounded theory is the expression of my paradigm.
Within the context of researcher positionality, constructivism sets a basis for possible subjectivity and bias due to a high level of likelihood of influencing the studied phenomenon by personal attitudes. As stated by Dezin and Lincoln (2013), the inquirer posture in constructivism implies that a researcher is a “passionate participant” as a facilitator of multivoiced reconstruction (p. 2016). Indeed, I tend to incorporate my personal experience and accumulated knowledge to participate in the study I am conducting, not merely observing the issue from a distance. I am likely to assimilate with the investigated issue and apply the attitudes and ideas I possess to examine the issues better and retrieve scientific findings. In particular, race, cultural background, and individual experience play a significant role in conducting qualitative research (Milner IV, 2007). As a Latino individual coming from a family of immigrants and living in a minority community, I have witnessed many struggles that my peers faced when trying to obtain opportunities for a good education and life. My journey is also challenging since I have become a college student in an environment where graduation from school is not very common. Having observed the difficulties that underrepresented individuals encounter, I am inclined to act in the direction of improving the opportunities for vulnerable populations by motivating them. This vision aligns with the grounded theory that reality is interpretive and constructed of subjective ideas that allow for contextualizing and interpreting phenomena to identify theoretical explanations.
The seemingly prejudiced approach to interpreting ethnicity and race issues might incline my so-called ‘insider’ view toward bias in the research. Indeed, due to the reflexivity in qualitative research, my assumptions might hinder the objectivity of findings (Berger, 2015). However, the awareness of my positionality allows me to address the potential for bias and direct my interpretive and constructivist paradigms toward the purposes of advocacy. In such a manner, the goals of my research will be effectively achieved and the findings mean.
In summation, the identified epistemological and ontological paradigms demonstrated that my personal experience, educational history, and overall alignment with the constructivist approach to the qualitative research process define my researcher’s lens. The constructivist grounded theory allows for interpreting reality by applying my personal experience. I am aware that such an approach might produce opportunities for bias and hinder the authenticity of inquiry. To eliminate the risk of bias, I will exercise reflection throughout the research process to ensure the objective presentation of data and discussion of findings. A well-defined plan of action and awareness of possible bias will allow for producing reliable and credible research results.
References
Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 219-234.
Dezin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2013). The landscape of qualitative research. Sage.
Milner IV, H. R. (2007). Race, culture, and researcher positionality: Working through dangers seen, unseen, and unforeseen. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 388-400.
Walliman, N. (2011). Research theory, Research methods: the basics. Routledge.
Willis, J. W. (2007). Foundations of qualitative research interpretive and critical approaches. Sage