Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

RESEARCH ETHICS IN POSITIVIST, INTERPRETIVIST, AND PRAGMATIST PARADIGMS

View through CrossRef
Maintaining ethics in research will defend its credibility, usefulness, and impact within society. However, ethics can vary significantly between research paradigms. This is due to the kinds of ontological, epistemological, and methodological philosophies that each possesses. This paper studies research ethics within positivist, interpretivist, and pragmatist paradigms. There is a clear difference between these paradigms. Ethical considerations in the positivist paradigm concentrated on objectivity, reliability, and treating people fairly. Researchers must uphold objectivity, refrain from prejudice, and defend the rights of participants. Getting informed consent, protecting data, and reducing the possibility of harm to research participants during surveys or experiments are important ethical considerations. The interpretivist paradigm places a high value on ethical concerns arising from subjectivity, ethnocentrism, and researcher involvement. Researchers need to manage personal dynamics, engage in reflexivity, and establish trust with participants. Relational ethics values participants’ lived experiences and promotes collaborative knowledge creation, going beyond traditional judgement to ensure ethical engagement. To consolidate both paradigms, a flexible approach is introduced as the pragmatist paradigm. This is distinguished by methodological diversity and practical problem-solving. Pragmatist researchers, therefore, combine qualitative and quantitative methods to observe ethical dilemmas in a situation-appropriate manner. The researcher must critically balance their ethical responsibilities under various approaches to ensure that moral principles are maintained without sacrificing the flexibility of their study. Using a comparative approach, it reviews literature, research ethics guidelines, and philosophical texts to analyse ethical practices within each paradigm, focusing on ontological, epistemological, and axiological beliefs in research ethics. Ethical decisions should be grounded in the study's philosophical and methodological context, promoting responsible and contextually aware research practices. This paper provides researchers and all parties involved with useful information to enhance ethical standards that consider different research traditions.
Title: RESEARCH ETHICS IN POSITIVIST, INTERPRETIVIST, AND PRAGMATIST PARADIGMS
Description:
Maintaining ethics in research will defend its credibility, usefulness, and impact within society.
However, ethics can vary significantly between research paradigms.
This is due to the kinds of ontological, epistemological, and methodological philosophies that each possesses.
This paper studies research ethics within positivist, interpretivist, and pragmatist paradigms.
There is a clear difference between these paradigms.
Ethical considerations in the positivist paradigm concentrated on objectivity, reliability, and treating people fairly.
Researchers must uphold objectivity, refrain from prejudice, and defend the rights of participants.
Getting informed consent, protecting data, and reducing the possibility of harm to research participants during surveys or experiments are important ethical considerations.
The interpretivist paradigm places a high value on ethical concerns arising from subjectivity, ethnocentrism, and researcher involvement.
Researchers need to manage personal dynamics, engage in reflexivity, and establish trust with participants.
Relational ethics values participants’ lived experiences and promotes collaborative knowledge creation, going beyond traditional judgement to ensure ethical engagement.
To consolidate both paradigms, a flexible approach is introduced as the pragmatist paradigm.
This is distinguished by methodological diversity and practical problem-solving.
Pragmatist researchers, therefore, combine qualitative and quantitative methods to observe ethical dilemmas in a situation-appropriate manner.
The researcher must critically balance their ethical responsibilities under various approaches to ensure that moral principles are maintained without sacrificing the flexibility of their study.
Using a comparative approach, it reviews literature, research ethics guidelines, and philosophical texts to analyse ethical practices within each paradigm, focusing on ontological, epistemological, and axiological beliefs in research ethics.
Ethical decisions should be grounded in the study's philosophical and methodological context, promoting responsible and contextually aware research practices.
This paper provides researchers and all parties involved with useful information to enhance ethical standards that consider different research traditions.

Related Results

Pragmatist reflective equilibrium
Pragmatist reflective equilibrium
AbstractRawls’ notion of reflective equilibrium has a hybrid character. It is embedded in the pragmatist tradition, but also includes various Kantian and other non-pragmatist eleme...
Paradigms in International and Cross-Cultural Management Research
Paradigms in International and Cross-Cultural Management Research
Paradigms exist and have always existed everywhere—assumptions about the world and how it works: Is the Earth round or flat? Is the Earth or the Sun at the center of the universe? ...
Interpretivist Interviewing
Interpretivist Interviewing
Abstract Interpretivist interviewing is a tool for self-reflectively exploring in fine and personal detail how people experience and conceive of phenomena that ra...
Tlacoqualli in Monequi "The Center Good"
Tlacoqualli in Monequi "The Center Good"
Photo by Andrew James on Unsplash INTRODUCTION Since its inception, bioethics has focused on Western conceptions of ethics and science. This has provided a strong foundation to bui...
Een kritisch-pragmatische bestuurskunde
Een kritisch-pragmatische bestuurskunde
A critical-pragmatist public administration A pragmatic criticaster or a critical pragmatist is considered a schizophrenic in daily life: it seems impossible to be soluti...
Keynes, Ramsey and Pragmatism
Keynes, Ramsey and Pragmatism
In his recent paper in this journal, Bateman (2021) breaks with the “Standard View” of Ramsey’s influence on Keynes and argues that Ramsey’s pragmatist philosophical thought underp...
KEYNES, RAMSEY AND PRAGMATISM
KEYNES, RAMSEY AND PRAGMATISM
In his recent paper in this journal, Bateman (2021) breaks with the “Standard View” of Ramsey’s influence on Keynes and argues that Ramsey’s pragmatist philosophical thought underp...

Back to Top