Identifying of The Research Paradigms and Purposes on the journal topic is “Emotion and attribution of intentionality in leader–member relationships” under the umbrella term of Interpretivism
1. Introduction
Previously, the qualitative research has received little attention. In the present, There are widely acceptable that qualitative research is a valuable source of information that needs to be considered in formulations of best available evidence. When a researcher has questions about events or experiences for which little is known, designing a research study that will provide causal explanation or prediction may be difficult In such cases, because little or no knowledge of variables exists that may be pertinent to the event or experience or how these variables may be related, a qualitative research study may be the most appropriate approach. Qualitative research examines events or experiences in context from the perspective of the individuals experiencing the phenomena. This approach allows the researcher to explore the depth and complexity of a phenomenon, identify and describe its components and their relationships, and develop a picture of the whole that can enhance and guide practice and future research. A qualitative approach also is appropriate when an investigator seeks to generate new theory or reformulate ideas about a known phenomenon or process when some indication exists that current knowledge or theories may be incomplete or biased. A qualitative method also may be used to identify questions and develop instruments for quantitative research. Qualitative research is appropriate to address such questions as, “What is going on here? How can I explain it?” or to describe how people live or cope with particular experiences. (Cheryl Bagley Thompson, 1998)
2.1 Research paradigms
There are some differences research paradigms under the umbrella term of Interpretivism. (David Carson et al.,2002), as illustrated by summaries below in Figure 1.
Figure 1 : Differences research paradigmsunder the umbrella term of Interpretivism
|
Realism Theory - Assumes reality is “out there” but is only imperfectly and probabilistically apprehensible - Perception is not reality that is a window onto reality - Using this approach examine Phenomena
|
Critical Theory - Assumes discoverable social,political, cultural or economic realities - Requires interactive linking between researcher and participants - All claims are relative to the values of researcher
|
|
Constructivism - Acceptance of multiple discoverable realities which are socially and empirically based,intangible mental construction of individuals - To achieve an understanding of the similarities and differences of construction
|
Phenomenology - Described as the “science of subjective” - Oriented primarily toward the immediate phenomena of human experience - We can be certain about how independent Existence of objects appear in consciousness
|
|
Hermeneutics - Interpreting human traces in order to “read between the line” (more transphenomenonal)
|
Naturalistic inquiry - A naturalistic perspective holds that there are multiple constructed realities that can be studied only holistically - The aim of inquiry is to develop an idiographic body of knowledge in the form of “working hypotheses” - All entities are in state of mutual simultaneous Shaping
|
|
Humanism - A point is raised as it explicitly advocates - Researcher understanding arises from direct personal experiences and take account of values of the researcher and context of the research
|
|
Tashakkori,A. and Teddlie,C. address that there are six aspects which relevant to the paradigms of qualitative research are: ontology epistemology axiology logic methods ,and causal linkage. (Tashakkori,A. and Teddlie,C. ,1998).
2.2 Techniques and methods
There is a wide range of techniques and methods available for use in qualitative research. George Carruther ,1999 take four main methods , summarized in Figure 2 , are all as shown below.
(inserted picture)
Figure 2: The four main methods of qualitative research
David Carson et al.,2002 explain interpretive techniques and methods as perceivable reality and their value in context of research.The techniques and methods are related to relevance for research issues (see Figure 3 ).
Figure 3: Qualitative techniques and methods,their purpose in use
|
Techniques and methods |
Uses |
|
- Participant observation/contributions - Content analysis
|
as specific research techniques |
|
-Small survey,used qualitatively |
Useful on their own but better when combined with other methods |
|
- Conversation analysis - Observation
|
Only focus on what people say,what can be observed,or what has been written |
|
More comprehensive/holistic methodologies - In-depth/convergent interviews/focus group - Action research and learning - Ground theory - Ethnographic studies - Case studies
|
Comprehensive methodologies; allow for gathering wide range of data : allow for observation ,what people say ,written material, documentary evidence ;and over time, not one-off, time-specific approach |
2.3 Research purposes
There are some considerations that necessary to truly understand a typology of research purpose and appropriately select the methods to investigate the question that are derived from that purpose. Tashakkori,A. and Teddlie,C. provides 9 general purpose for social science research could be categorized as follows : 1) Predict 2) Add to the knowledge 3)Have a personal ,social ,institutional ,and/or organizational impact 4) Measure change 5) Understand complex phenomena 6) Test new ideas 7) Generate new ideas 8) Inform constituencies 9) Examine the past. (Tashakkori,A. and Teddlie,C. ,2003).
2.4 A model of emotions and leadership intentionality in this article
The model presented in Figure 4 is developed to refer the role of emotions in the leader–member relationship.
Figure 4: A model of emotions and attribution of intentionality in leader–member relationships.
(inserted picture)
3. Discussion
3.1 Identify the research paradigm
After I have analysed the journal topic ; “Emotion and attribution of intentionality in leader–member relationships , finding that in this article focuses in Naturalistic inquiry paradigm ,as reasoned by brief summaries below.
• The aim of inquiry is to develop an idiographic body of knowledge in the form of “working hypotheses”.
• A perspective holds that there are multiple constructed realities that studied holistically of intentionality within the leader–member relationship.
• All entities are in state of mutual simultaneous shaping from meta-synthesis.
• Inquiry is influenced by the substantive theory used to guide analysis of data and interpretation of findings.
• Inquiry is influenced by the values that are inherent in the context.
I would like to conclude these reasons with six aspects of Naturalistic inquiry paradigm under the umbrella term of Interpretivism are:
Figure 5: The reasons with six aspects of Naturalistic inquiry paradigm(this topic)
|
six aspects of paradigm |
Naturalistic inquiry |
|
1)Ontology |
- Choose explanations that best produce desired outcome |
|
2)Epistemology |
- Both objective and subjective point of view |
|
3)Axiology |
- values play a large role in interpreting results |
|
4)Logic |
- Inductive/Deductive |
|
5)Methods |
- Qualitative |
|
6)Causal linkage. |
- There may be causal relationships ,but we will never be able to pin them down. |
3.2 Identify the research purposes
After I convinced this typology of purpose, I would like to provide this research 70% are in adding to knowledge base (reinterpret previously collected data/clarify structural and ideological connections between important social process/strengthen knowledge base) and 30% in generating new ideas(generate hypotheses).
4. Reference
Cheryl Bagley Thompson, “Basics of Research (Part 12):Qualitative
Research”. Air Yedlorl Journal 17:2 April-June 1998: 64-65.
George Carruther, “A critical review of research paradigmasn and
Strategies and their role in chiropractice research”.
The British Journal of Chiropractic,1999.Vol3 No.4:83-84.
Marie T. Dasborough and Neal M. Ashkanasy, “Emotion and
attribution of intentionality in leader–member relationships”,
The Leadership Quarterly 13 (2002) 615–634.
Tashakkori,A. and Teddlie,C. “Mixed Methodologies :Combine
Qualitative and Quantitative Approach” ,SAGE publication..
David Carson et al.,Qualitative Marketing Research.2002: 15-18 and 71.
Tashakkori,A. and Teddlie,C. Handbook of Mixed Methods
Eds,Thousand Oaks,CA : SAGE publication,2003.
