Reflection Study Methodological Pluralism

Question: Discuss about the Reflection Studyfor Methodological Pluralism. Answer: Article 1: Knox, K.T. (2004) A researcher's dilemma-philosphical and methodological pluralism. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 2(2), pp.119-128. From this article, I have learnt about how philosophical and methodological pluralism creates confusion for the researcher in performing a research. I have understood that linking of research methods with a particular philosophic argument could influence the ability of researcher to make creative selection of data collection methods in negative manner. I have learnt that the researchers selection of philosophical arguments or stance in a research is required to be very precise as it helps to make more informed and creative selection of the research methods. I came to know the relationship between qualitative and quantitative methods with the philosophic argument by learning theory and model of Ticehurst and Veal and Saunders. I understood from this article that philosophic arguments may not be an appropriate basis to make selection of the research methods. I have learnt from the article that clear understanding regarding the relationship between research philosophy and methods is critical. I came to know from this article that the relationship among the research philosophy, theory and method is quite complex in the social science. I learnt from this that the perspective to linking research philosophic argument to the method may cause confusing in creating the research process. The learning of this article could be used to determine the process of conducting research. It raised question regarding the right way to select the research methods and the role of philosophical stance in the process of selecting research methods within the social science. The learning from this article leads to the change in my point of view for the relationship of research philosophy and methods. Article 2: Brannen, J. (2005) Mixing methods: The entry of qualitative and quantitative approaches into the research process. International journal of social research methodology, 8(3), pp.173-184. In this article, the use of mixed methods including qualitative and quantitative is examined to determine its influence on the research process. I came to know from this article that qualitative and quantitative paradigm provide guidance to the researcher in developing epistemological assumptions and using theoretical approaches and methods in the study of social world. I have learnt that objectivism, constructionism and subjectivism are three epistemological assumptions in which different approaches are used to study the social world. The selection of research methods is influenced by the selection of epistemological assumption in a research. Through this, I learnt the presence of ambiguity in the selection of mixed research method in social science studies in which researcher adopts an epistemological assumption. Mixing method approach in a research creates issues for a social science researcher to make selection of the research methods. I came to know through this that methods in qualitative and quantitative are contrary to each other and due to this it causes difficulties for the researcher to integrate the successfully to perform research in the social science field. I have also learnt that paradigmatic assumptions are re-emerged on timely basis, which influences the selection of research methods. It is learnt from this article that theoretical perspectives emphasizes on the considering these as two different approaches, whereas in terms of application, researcher are tended to avoid this divide and use both as mixed methods. References Brannen, J. (2005) Mixing methods: The entry of qualitative and quantitative approaches into the research process. International journal of social research methodology, 8(3), pp.173-184. Knox, K.T. (2004) A researcher's dilemma-philosphical and methodological pluralism. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 2(2), pp.119-128.