首页> 外文期刊>African Journal of Emergency Medicine >From conception to coherence: The determination of correct research ‘posture’
【24h】

From conception to coherence: The determination of correct research ‘posture’

机译:从概念到连贯性:正确研究“姿势”的确定

获取原文
       

摘要

(First 300 words) Introduction (from conception to philosophy) The first article in this series provided a brief conceptual understanding of research. It postulated that the many ways of acquiring knowledge included tradition, authority, logical reasoning, experience, intuition, borrowing and the scientific method. Of these, the scientific method is the most sophisticated and reliable. It is this sophistication, in the form of research philosophy and methodological paradigms that is the object of this article. How data are collected and interpreted depends on how one conceives of the “world” and its knowledge constructs, as scientific inquiry is defined not at the level of the methodology but at the level of the paradigm. This paradigmatic framing of research activity and philosophical posturing of the researcher provides the external coherence prerequisite of scientific research. Alternative research paradigms that determine ‘posture’ In seeking an epistemological position (how we come to know), one needs to also consider the ontological lens (world view) and methodological paradigm most befitting the aims and objectives of the study. To determine the appropriate “posture” 1 , some factors against which the alternative inquiry paradigms may be compared include: the nature of the knowledge sought, ways in which knowledge is accumulated (and accommodated), quality criteria and ethics. 2 To demonstrate reflexivity and appropriateness of choice for a study, the paradigms positivism, interpretivism and critical theory are appraised against some of the factors mentioned above. Only fundamental dilemmas are discussed below. To contextualize the above paradigms and facilitate understanding, the topic of inter-personal violence prevention will be used as this is a global phenomenon burdening health care. 3–5 To answer the research question: “What are the reciprocal meanings for inter-personal violence and emergency medicine?”, the further question is: “What is the paradigm that will best inform the researcher’s posture toward this question?”.
机译:(前300个字)简介(从概念到哲学)本系列的第一篇文章简要介绍了研究的概念性理解。它假定获取知识的许多方式包括传统,权威,逻辑推理,经验,直觉,借用和科学方法。其中,科学方法是最先进,最可靠的方法。本文以研究哲学和方法范式的形式为代表。数据的收集和解释方式取决于人们对“世界”及其知识构造的看法,因为科学探究不是在方法论层面而是在范式层面上定义的。研究活动的这种范式框架和研究人员的哲学姿态为科学研究提供了外部连贯性的前提。确定“姿势”的替代研究范式在寻求认识论立场(我们如何知道)时,还需要考虑最适合研究目的和目标的本体论视角(世界观)和方法范式。为了确定适当的“姿势” 1,可以与替代询问范式进行比较的一些因素包括:所寻求知识的性质,知识积累(和容纳)的方式,质量标准和道德规范。 2为了证明研究的反思性和选择的适当性,针对上述一些因素对范式实证主义,解释主义和批判理论进行了评估。下面仅讨论基本难题。为了使以上范例具体化,并促进理解,将使用预防人际暴力这一主题,因为这是负担医疗保健的全球性现象。 3–5要回答研究问题:“人际暴力和急诊医学的相互含义是什么?”,另外一个问题是:“什么范式最能说明研究者对此问题的态度?”。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号