Research Philosophy Explained

As we explained in our article on Saunders, Lewis, and Thornhill’s (2011) “Research Onion”, the outermost layer of the onion concerns research philosophy. At this stage of designing a study, you have several philosophies to choose from, and each one shapes how you approach your research questions, select your methods, and interpret your findings (Sahay, 2016).

The major research philosophies are positivism, interpretivism, pragmatism, and realism. Before choosing one, reflect on your own assumptions and beliefs in relation to each. There is no single “best” philosophy; your choice should be deliberate and grounded in a clear understanding of each option (Saunders and Tosey, 2013).

Choose a philosophy at random and you will probably discover, sooner or later, a clash between it and your own assumptions — which can create problems and cost you valuable time. One simple way to think of a research philosophy is as a “way of seeing” your research problem (Saunders et al., 2011). You wouldn’t pick your prescription glasses at random, and the same goes for your research philosophy.

So far, the key points about research philosophies are:

• As a “way of seeing”, a research philosophy influences every part of a research project;
• There are different types of research philosophy;
• Choosing a suitable one requires a clear understanding of each.

The aim of this article, then, is to give a more systematic and academic definition of “research philosophy”. With a clearer sense of what it is, you will appreciate why it is so important to choose carefully among the four major philosophies: positivism, interpretivism, pragmatism, and realism.

A full list of references (in Harvard style) is given at the end.

What Is Research Philosophy?

Although “research philosophy” sounds profound and complex, the concept is fairly simple.

You have a set of assumptions and beliefs — things you take for granted about your place in the world, how the future will unfold, and what you can understand as a human being. (If you doubt that, Sherman and Gilbert (2010) make a convincing case.)

Just as you have such a set, a research philosophy can be defined as a coherent set — or system — of well-considered assumptions and beliefs about the development of knowledge (Saunders et al., 2011).

Note how crucial the phrase “about the development of knowledge” is. This is what separates your personal philosophy from a research philosophy, because research is concerned specifically with developing knowledge in a given field.

Note, too, that while your personal beliefs are likely to shift over time, the assumptions associated with a research philosophy tend to remain stable. The positivist philosophy, like any other, is a consistent system of assumptions and beliefs.

With that in mind, we can take Saunders et al.’s (2011, p. 124) definition as our working one: “The term research philosophy refers to a system of beliefs and assumptions about the development of knowledge.”

In the next section, we outline the three categories of assumption that lie at the heart of any research philosophy.

Types of Assumptions: Ontological, Epistemological, and Axiological

The positivist, interpretivist, pragmatist, and realist philosophies differ — and are distinguished — by the ontological, epistemological, and axiological assumptions they make. Because each philosophy is a system of beliefs and assumptions, what marks one out is precisely how its core assumptions differ from the others’.

To appreciate the differences between the major philosophies, then, it helps to examine the assumptions each one makes. Saunders et al. (2011) divide these into three types: ontological, epistemological, and axiological.

A detailed account of all three is beyond the scope of this article. To get you started, however, the next section introduces ontological assumptions.

Ontological Assumptions

Ontology, the study of “being”, is concerned with “what is” and the nature of reality (Al-Saadi, 2014). From a social-research perspective, The SAGE Dictionary of Social Research Methods (Jupp, 2006) defines ontology as “a concept concerned with the existence of, and relationship between, different aspects of society, such as social actors, cultural norms, and social structures.”

Ontological research assumptions, therefore, are the assumptions a researcher makes about the nature of reality (Saunders et al., 2011). This can sound abstract, so consider an example.

Suppose you want to explore the relationship between music preferences and academic attainment. If you assume that certain music preferences always harm academic attainment — as some researchers once did (Giovacchini, 1999) — that assumption will frame your whole study (for instance, “How can we shape music preferences in a way we think is positive?”).

By contrast, if you assume that confounding variables mediate the relationship between music preferences and attainment (which appears to be the case) (Cundiff, 2013), a quite different strand of research follows.

The example shows that your ontology strongly influences how you see the world, how you view your topic, and — ultimately — the decisions you make about what to focus on.

Summary

The research philosophy you choose, as the first layer of Saunders et al.’s (2011) Research Onion, has major implications for your design. It shapes the questions you pursue, the methods you use to answer them, and the way you interpret your findings.

This article has offered a clear definition and explanation of what a research philosophy is, and has shown how you can begin to distinguish the major philosophies — by examining the beliefs and assumptions that underpin each one.

References

Al-Saadi, H. (2014) Demystifying Ontology and Epistemology in Research Methods. University of Sheffield.

Cundiff, G. (2013) The influence of rap and hip-hop music: An analysis of audience perceptions of misogynistic lyrics. Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications. 4 (1), 1–4.

Giovacchini, A. M. (1999) The Negative Influence of Gangster Rap and What Can Be Done About It. Stanford University.

Jupp, V. (2006) The SAGE Dictionary of Social Research Methods. London: SAGE Publications.

Sahay, A. (2016) Peeling Saunders’s Research Onion.

Saunders, M. and Tosey, P. (2013) The layers of research design. Rapport, Winter, 58–59.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., and Thornhill, A. (2011) Research Methods for Business Students. 5th edn. Harlow: Pearson.

Sherman, B. and Gilbert, H. (2010) Knowledge and Assumptions. Princeton University.