Paradigms in Qualitative Research

  • Bartosz Sławecki


The aim of the chapter is to raise novice researchers’ awareness of the significance of philosophical assumptions for their practical activity. The text presents the basic terms connected with the methodology of social sciences. The entire discussion is centered on the issue of paradigms. Various approaches within the framework of basic philosophical assumptions are discussed—concerning the nature of social reality (ontologies), the nature of scientific cognition (epistemologies), and practical ways of conducting social research (methodologies). An important element of the text is the presentation of two classifications of paradigms in social sciences with particular consideration given to qualitative research.


Paradigms Ontology Epistemology Methodology Subjectivism Objectivism 


  1. Benton, T., & Craib, I. (2010). Philosophy of Social Science: The Philosophical Foundations of Social Thought (2nd ed.). Houndsmill/Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  2. Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1985). Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis: Elements of the Sociology of Corporate Life. Farnham: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2005). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Giddens, A. (1993). New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretative Sociologies. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Paradigmatic Controversies, Contradictions, and Emerging Confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed., pp. 191–215). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. Heller, M. (2011). Philosophy in Science. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Heron, J. (1996). Co-Operative Inquiry: Research into the Human Condition. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Hetmański, M. (2008). Epistemology—Old Dilemmas and New Perspectives. Dialogue and Universalism, 18(7/8), 11–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kostera, M. (1996). Postmodernizm w zarządzaniu [Postmodernism in Management]. Warsaw: PWE.Google Scholar
  10. Kostera, M. (2007). Organisational Ethnography: Methods and Inspirations. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
  11. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd ed., enl). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  12. McCloskey, D. (1983). The Rhetoric of Economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 21(2), 481–517.Google Scholar
  13. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Morgan, G. (1980). Paradigms, Metaphors, and Puzzle Solving in Organization Theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(4), 605–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Morgan, G. (1981). The Schismatic Metaphor and Its Implications for Organizational Analysis. Organization Studies, 2(1), 23–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Morgan, G. (1983). More on Metaphor: Why We Cannot Control Tropes in Administrative Science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(4), 601–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Morgan, G. (2006). Images of Organization (Updated ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Schutz, A. (1972). Collected Papers I. M. Natanson (Ed.) (T. 11). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.Google Scholar
  19. Silverman, D. (2005). Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Sintonen, M., Wolenski, J., & Niiniluoto, I. (2004). Handbook of Epistemology. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  21. Woleński, J. (2004). The History of Epistemology. In I. Niiniluoto, M. Sintonen, & J. Woleński (Eds.), Handbook of Epistemology (pp. 3–54). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bartosz Sławecki
    • 1
  1. 1.Poznań University of Economics and BusinessPoznańPoland

Personalised recommendations