Ravalier PhD Theis.pdf - Anglia Ruskin Research Online

114
1a.1) Research Paradigm: Pragmatism
Doyle et al. (2009) describe mixed methods as the approach which can close the gap often associated with
monomethod research. Application of mixed methods therefore assumes that both interpretivist and positivist
approaches can be taken in research, meaning that there are not only a number of knowledges of the social world,
but also a variety of methods which can be used to find this information. As such neither monomethod approach is
the best when it comes to gathering understanding of people's lives (Dures et al., 2010). Mixed methods research
should therefore integrate a research paradigm which allows the use of qualitative and quantitative research into
the most workable methodology. Along these lines the pragmatic paradigm is utilised as an approach for the use
with mixed research methods. Pragmatism dismisses the monomethod approach advocated by strict quantitative
or qualitative researchers, allowing the use of both methodologies within a single research study (Schulenberg,
2007).
While figures such as Dewey, James and Pierce originally articulated the ideas of pragmatism; Tashakkori and
Teddlie (2003) formally links pragmatism and mixed methods research, arguing that:
1. Both quantitative and qualitative research methods may be used in a single study.
2. The research question should be of primary importance, more important than either the method or the
philosophical view that underlies the method.
3. The forced choice dichotomy between positivism and constructivism should be abandoned.
4. A practical and applied research methodology should guide methodological choices.
Therefore pragmatic researchers embrace both qualitative and quantitative methodologies, rejecting true
positivist and constructivist approaches, and is an approach which “embraces plurality of method and multiple