Interpretivism vs Positivism | A simple explanation of interpretivist vs positivist research for beginners

The interpretivist and positivist research paradigms. How are they different? Well, let me give you my simple explanation, specifically written for beginners in the world of graduate research. No jargon here! Well, there is a little bit of jargon, but I will explain exactly what it means!

Now, if you’ve read my previous posts on paradigms and positivism, you’ll know I love a high school clique analogy. If interpretivism was a high school clique, it would be the artsy, creative kids.

In this blogpost, we’re going to take a closer look at that.

This blogpost is the third in my four part series about all things paradigm. As I just said, the first two are about paradigms in general and positivism in particular. This one’s all about interpretivism and the next one will do a deep dive into critical realism.

Paradigms - a quick recap

In first blogpost, I covered the basics of paradigms, so I won't repeat it all now, but let's do a quick recap.

Paradigms are like different cliques in high school, each with its own culture, way of seeing the world, way of doing things. Each of them attaches different degrees of importance to particular things.

Positivists are like the science geeks, focusing on facts and objective truth.

Interpretivists are like the artsy creative crowd, interested in people's stories and experiences.

And critical realists are like the activists, digging into deeper issues for social justice.

These paradigms all see different things when they look at the social world, it’s kind of like putting different coloured lenses into a pair of glasses, and they all have different ideas about the best way to do research about that social world. Almost like different forms of transport or routes people might take, different ways of getting to the answers they want.

And those things, the different glasses and the different forms of transport – they essentially sum up ontology and epistemology, which are also important to understanding paradigms.

Ontology and Epistemology

Ontology is all about answering the question: "What?".

It's about understanding what exactly we're studying in the world.

When we look at the social world, what do we see through the specific colour of lenses we have in our glasses?

Do we see the social world as fixed and independent, like a hotel that exists regardless of us being there (realism), or do we see it as fluid and shaped by our interactions, like a home that we actively create and influence (social constructivism)?

Epistemology, on the other hand, deals with the question: "How?".

It's about how we study the social world.

How do we get there? What form of transport do we take?

Positivists aim to explain things and identify causes, focusing on objectivity and empirical evidence, taking the most efficient route possible on the sat nav. Interpretivists aim to understand meanings and interpretations, emphasising subjectivity and the importance of context and perspective, taking a more scenic route on the sat nav.

Now, a quick note: epistemology covers a spectrum, with positivism and interpretivism as two distinct ends. But they’re also the names given to the overarching paradigms.

Positivism is a paradigm, it’s also an epistemology.

Interpretivism is a paradigm, and it’s also an epistemology.

Yeah, the joys of academia right?

But they go together, so they’re easy to remember. The positivist paradigm adopts a positivist epistemology. The interpretivist paradigm adopts an interpretivist epistemology.

Okay, let’s get into the details of interpretivism.

Interpretivism

Interpretivism, much like the artsy, creative high school clique, brings a unique perspective to the research scene, emphasising subjective meanings and individual experiences.

"Subjective meanings" refers to the personal thoughts and feelings people have about their experiences.

These thoughts and feelings come from each person's own point of view and life experiences. These subjective meanings can vary from person to person because everyone sees things differently.

For example, something that makes one person sad – having plans for a big night out cancelled - might make someone else (i.e. me!) super happy. Going out partying has never been my jam, other people absolutely love it. We’re all different, and that’s fine.

Let's take a look at the key principles of interpretivism.

Interpretivist Ontology

For interpretivists, reality is like a canvas waiting to be painted with individual interpretations and personal meanings.

Unlike the positivist view of the social world as relatively fixed, stable and consistent, interpretivists see it as a dynamic, ever-changing artwork shaped by the diverse perspectives of individuals.

They see the social world like an art exhibition where each painting tells a different story, reflecting the unique experiences and interpretations of the artists.

Interpretivist Epistemology

Imagine you're studying a painting in an art gallery.

For positivists, it's like analysing the painting under a microscope, trying to dissect its colours, shapes, and composition to explain how it was created and what techniques were used. They're focused on identifying the specific brushstrokes, pigments, and artistic processes that led to the final masterpiece, aiming to uncover the underlying causes and mechanisms behind its creation.

On the other hand, for interpretivists, studying the painting is more like immersing yourself in its beauty and exploring the emotions, stories, and meanings it evokes. They're less concerned with analysing the technical aspects of the painting and more interested in understanding the artist's intentions, the cultural context in which it was created, and the diverse interpretations it elicits from viewers.

Interpretivists really care about how people feel and connect. They love digging into the deep meanings hidden in symbols, feelings, and stories. To do this, they use methods that involve talking to and interacting with people, like interviews and ethnographies. Interpretivists spend time with people to understand their cultures and what makes them special. This helps them explore how different people see and feel about whatever they’re studying.

Interpretivism challenges the positivist notion of a concrete, objective reality by celebrating the diversity of human experiences and interpretations. Like the artsy high school clique, interpretivists embrace subjectivity, creativity, and the rich tapestry of human existence.

While positivists focus on uncovering processes, laws and patterns, interpretivists are more interested in exploring the colourful palette of human experience.

Whilst positivism very much positions the researcher as the expert, interpretivism takes a different stance. Interpretivism sees the participant as the expert, valuing the unique perspectives and insights that participants bring to the research process. Instead of imposing their own interpretations onto the data, interpretivist researchers aim to understand the world through the eyes of the participants, acknowledging their expertise in navigating their social and cultural contexts.

Lets now take a look at an example of interpretivist research in social science.

Interpretivist research example – Snow and Anderson Identity Work Among the Homeless: The Verbal Construction and Avowal of Personal Identities

This study offers a compelling example of an interpretivist approach to social science research, particularly in the context of studying homelessness.

Snow and Anderson jumped right into the community, spending time with people, listening to their stories. They got to know them, understood how they found strength and dignity, even in tough situations. They wanted to learn about how people who are homeless see themselves and how they express their feelings and experiences, especially since they're often overlooked or marginalised by society.

This focus on exploring people's personal experiences fits perfectly with interpretivist principles, which highlight the importance of understanding social issues from the perspective of those who are directly involved, through their eyes, essentially walking in their shoes.

One key aspect of the study was something Snow and Anderson called "identity talk." This refers to how the participants talk about themselves and their lives. They were able to capture the different ways people made sense of their experiences and relationships. They noticed some key themes in how people talked about themselves, like trying to keep their distance from certain parts of their past, embracing other aspects, or even creating stories to make sense of their lives.

Anderson and Snow also paid attention to how people's experiences changed over time. They saw that the way people talked about themselves often depended on how long they'd been living on the streets. This understanding of how things change over time shows that they were looking at more than just snapshots of people's lives. They were considering the bigger picture, which is a key aspect of interpretivist research.

Overall, Anderson and Snow's study very much embodied interpretivist ideas. They used qualitative methods, like talking to people and observing their lives, to explore the personal experiences of homeless individuals. By doing this, they gained valuable insights into how people shape their identities and find meaning in challenging circumstances.

Recap

In this blogpost, we took a deep dive into interpretivism, likening it to the artsy, creative clique in high school.

Interpretivism prioritises understanding subjective meanings and individual experiences, celebrating the diversity of human perspectives.

We explored how interpretivists view reality as a vibrant canvas of personal interpretations, unlike the fixed, objective reality of positivism.

In terms of studying the social world, interpretivists immerse themselves in it, exploring emotions, stories, and meanings.

They embrace qualitative methods like interviews and observations to unravel the layers of human subjectivity and creativity.

Unlike positivism, which positions the researcher as the expert, interpretivism sees the participant as the expert in their own lived experiences.

We looked at research by Snow and Anderson, an ethnographic study of homelessness, listening to people's stories and understanding their experiences firsthand.

Overall, interpretivism challenges positivist notions by valuing subjective experiences and celebrating the rich tapestry of human existence.

Got one hour? Ready to get clued up about paradigms?

If this blog post helped, you’ll love my 1-hour express course, Paradigms for Beginners.

In just 60 minutes, you'll gain the confidence to talk and write about key paradigms like positivism, post-positivism, interpretivism, critical realism, and pragmatism. By the end, you’ll not only understand where your research fits paradigmatically, but you'll also feel more confident in tackling philosophical concepts that may have felt overwhelming before.

The course includes five easy-reference cheat sheets on each paradigm and a guided worksheet to help you identify your own research stance. Plus, you can preview the first two lessons for free!

Ready to feel confident in your understanding of paradigms? Click here to learn more and enrol today. I can’t wait to see you inside!

Paradigms for Beginners Express Course