1. Paradigms & Models in Research Design Jan Marontate CMNS 801: Design and Methodology in Communication Research School of Communication. Simon Fraser University Spring 2010

2. Plan for Today’s Class Session n Introductions and consultations with Sylvia Roberts, CMNS area librarian n Overview of course assignments u Discussion of Readings & Notions about methodology texts u Discussion of aspects Methodological Design in 1st Exercise u “Special Topic Assignment” (Handouts 2 & 3) F Research Interests & Methodological Backgrounds F Choosing Topics and Scheduling Presentations n Paradigms and Theories of Research Design

3. The Research Process Babbie (1995) Social Science Research, p. 101

4. (Recall) Methods & Fundamental Assumptions u “Savoir, pouvoir, prévoir” (Auguste Comte) F To know, to be able (to have power), to predict the future and plan for it F To know, to be able (to have power), to predict the future and plan for it F Knowledge as power (to acquire skills for social action, change, forecasting) u “décrire, comprendre, expliquer” (Gilles Gaston Granger) F describe, understand and explain F Knowledge as understanding

5. -notion of “normal” science (Thomas Kuhn) n based on past achievements, that sci. community acknowledges as foundation for further practice n Innovations, need n recognition (and ability to attract adherents from competing modes of activity) n open-endedness (to leave problems for practitioners to resolve)

6. “paradigms” --a feature of Normal Science n other features n Generalizability n but as definitions of the paradigm become rigid the scientist builds anew—need not start from “first principles’ (can leave that to textbook writers)

7. Normal Science & Paradigm Shifts n a science of puzzle-solving (not problem-finding because everyone agrees on the paradigm for choosing problems) following rules. n How do breaks occur in these traditions? u observation & Anomaly --awareness (recognition) that observation has violated paradigm-induced expectations u Conceptual—theoretical--development of new concepts and vocabulary to describe and analyze the anomaly n -change of paradigms, recognition of “discovery” associated with crisis in established communities n -breakdown of normal technical puzzle-solving activity n -social & political pressures

8. Transition from one crisis to a new one (Kuhn) n Not cumulative in a mechanistic way, not necessarily ‘progress’ but have a history--a reconstruction of a new field of new fundamentals (theories & methods) n commitment to a paradigm necessary for the practice of “normal science” but not a uniquely “internal”— external factors (political, social etc.) Scientific Revolutions = changes of world vie n differentiates scientific articles, textbooks, popularizations and philosophies (the last three are not doing science—by testing the paradigm) but reconstructing and analyzing it.

9. Structure of Scientific Revolutions Ground-breaking because Kuhn a scientist—recognizes the social aspects of scientific practice— communities of scientists and suggests that science not “theory driven” in the internal sense

10. Empirical Research Methodology in the Social Sciences (20th-c. conventions) n Process involving u methods u logic of inquiry (assumptions & hypotheses) n produces u laws, principles and theories that can be tested F (Karl Popper & notion of falsifiability for politically engaged scholars interested in the fight against genocide in the early 20 th century)

11. The Research Process Babbie (1995) Social Science Research, p. 101

12. Methods & Fundamental Assumptions u “Savoir, pouvoir, prévoir” (Auguste Comte) F To know, to be able (to have power), to predict the future and plan for it F To know, to be able (to have power), to predict the future and plan for it F Knowledge as power (to acquire skills for social action, change, forecasting) u “décrire, comprendre, expliquer” (Gilles Gaston Granger) F describe, understand and explain F Knowledge as understanding

13. Classification of Theories to Understand Different Approaches n Paradigms, other typologies (like quantitative vs. qualitative) n direction of reasoning (induction, deduction, abduction) n level of ‘reality’ (micro, macro) n forms of explanation n theoretical frameworks n degree of abstraction

14. Identifying Styles of Research: Example of Quantitative vs. Qualitative Approaches (common about 20-30 yrs ago but still used) Neuman (2000: 16) Quantitative vs. Qualitative ObjectiveSubjective VariablesProcesses and events ReliabilityAuthenticity Value-Free Explicitly Stated Values Independent of ContextAware of Context Many cases or subjects Few cases or subjects Statistical Analysis Other qualities Detached ResearcherInvolved Researcher

15. Research Paradigms n Sets of shared patterns in a scholarly community about what constitutes worthwhile research (Thomas Kuhn, The structure of scientific revolutions) u What problems are worth investigating? u What constitutes an answer? n Different views on how approaches are grouped (cf. Lincoln & Guba)

16. Assumptions about nature of people & knowledge for use in classifying approaches (Burrell & Morgan)* Subjective vs.Objective Assumptions n n ontology : nominalism realism n n epistemology : anti-positivism positivism n n human nature: voluntarism determinism n n methodology: ideographic nomethetic (laws) (idiographic=unique, singular) *Burrell, G. and Morgan, G. (1982) “In search of a framework”, Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis. London: Heinemen, pp. 1-37.

17. Assumptions about Order/Conflict n Order/regulation) vs. Conflict/Radical Change) n Stability/solidarity Change/emancipation n IntegrationConflict n Functional coordination disintegration n consensus coercion n need satisfaction deprivation

18. Four Paradigms (Burrell & Morgan) radical humanist radical structuralist interpretive functionalist Conflict/radical change Order/stability/regulation subjective objective

19. Four Paradigms in Communications Research (Baxter & Babbie 2004)* n Positivism F Once widely taught as same as science F early religious aspect F association with quantitative research n Systems Paradigm n Interpretive Approaches F Verstehen F association with qualitative research F direct observation, context, meaningful action F holistic n Critical Theory Approaches * Baxter & Babbie (2004) The Basics of Communication Research, Toronto: Thomson Wadsworth.

20. Questions to Ask about Research (Neuman 1999)* 1. reasons for research 2. nature of social reality 3. nature of human beings 4. role of common sense 5. Ideas about what theory looks like 6. explanation that is acceptable 7. good evidence 8. place for values *W. Lawrence Neuman (1999) Social Research Methods. Qaultiative and Quantitative Approaches.Toronto: Allyn and Bacon.

21. Example: Positivism n 1. Why conduct research? u instrumental orientation u to predict and control n 2. Nature of Social Reality? u has order u fundamentally unchanging u can be discovered using science n 3. Nature of Human Beings? u self interest, pleasure seeking, rational u operate on basis of external causes, probability u mechanical model of man n 4. Science and common sense? u separate

22. Positivism (cont’d) n What constitutes Explanation or Theory? u science nomethetic (universal laws) u causal relationships, universally valid n 6. How to judge explanation u use reason : no logical contradictions u Observation, Replication n 7. Good evidence? u observations, empirical knowledge u can be communicated n 8. Social/Political Values? u value-free science u objectivity

23. Concepts associated with Positivism n Objective Reality that can be studied scientifically (logic & empirical observation) n Variables n Relationships between variables n Quantitative Reasoning

24. Interpretive Approaches n Why conduct research? u to understand meanings n 2. Nature of Social Reality? u importance of human consciousness u socially constructed u multiple social realities possible n 3. Nature of Human Beings? u people use meanings, have reasons u laws (?) n 4. Science and common sense? u must study common sense, pragmatic

25. Interpretive Approaches n 1. Why conduct research? u to understand meanings n 2. Nature of Social Reality? u importance of human consciousness u socially constructed u multiple social realities possible n 3. Nature of Human Beings? u people use meanings, have reasons u laws (?) n 4. Science and common sense? u must study common sense, pragmatic

26. Interpretive Approaches (cont’d) 5.. What constitutes Explanation or Theory F ideographic F “thick” descriptions), semantic relationships F Rules in interpretive traditions= shared beliefs 6. How to judge explanation– as understanding F makes sense to others F Heuristic framework 7. Good evidence? F in context, has meaning for social actors (evocative) 8. Social/Political Values? F does not try to be value free, state biases

27. Critical Theory as a Paradigm n Why conduct research? u discover structures u change world, action oriented u knowledge is power (from below) n 2. Nature of Social Reality? u changing u conflict (not always visible-myths, false consciousness) n 3. Nature of Human Beings? u have potential but can be mislead u potential realized through collective action n 4. Science and common sense? u idea of objective reality, underlying truths but science can be instrument of oppression

28. Critical Theoretical Approaches (cont’d) n 5. What constitutes Explanation or Theory u combination of determinism and voluntarism n 6. How to judge explanation u capacity to describe social conditions and promote change n 7. Good evidence? u material conditions separate from subjectivity but facts not neutral n 8. Social/Political Values? u everpresent, promotes activism

29. “Dimensions” of Research Neuman (2000: 37) Purpose of Study Intended Use of Study Treatment of Time in Study Space Unit of Analysis ExploratoryDescriptiveExplanatoryBasicApplied -Action -Action -Impact -Impact -Evaluation -EvaluationCross-sectionalLongitudinal -Panel -Panel -Time series -Time series -Cohort analysis -Cohort analysis - Case Study - Case Study - Trend study - Trend study -dependent individual -independent family household household artifact artifact (media, (media, technology) technology)

30. If time: Writing about Methods Platt, Jennifer. “Writing on Method” and “Theory and practice” in A history of sociological research methods in America, 1920-1960. Cambridge: Cambridge U. Press 1996, pp. 1-67, 106-142. n Emergence of methodological textbooks (social sciences) in N. America (c. 1920s) n writing on methods--often followed practices n Not necessarily derived from theory, influenced by commercial uses and social work n Shifts over time u 1920s-1940s --conflicts between qualitative & quantitative u 1940s-1960s-- little work on qualitative methods (more on notions like scaling, sampling, logic, design, practicalities of interviewing) u 1960s re-emergence of qualitative methods

31. Causes of writing about methods? n Rise of university programs, need for teaching resources n Professionalization & differentiation n Increasing orientation toward empirical research n Motivations often unstated (especially in ‘self-defence’-driven work

32. Problems n Relating methods to their uses and practices n Questions about relationship of specific methods to theories n Mode of transmissions n Methodological choices u Practical influences u Constraints (positive & negative) u Accidental u Notion of ‘bricolage’ u Untidiness of life in process

33. If time….

34. Two Paradigms n Bruhn-Jensen Reading

35. 15-2

36. 15-3

37. 15-4

38. 15-5