PhD social science research paradigms made super simple

What cooking styles can teach you about research paradigms

Ever feel like research paradigms are some kind of big academic secret no one ever explained? Like everyone else was sat down on day one of their PhD and told, “Here’s how paradigms work. Oh, but don’t tell Elizabeth.” Meanwhile, you’re hearing words like positivism, interpretivism, and pragmatism, and it’s like someone handed you a recipe in a language you don’t speak.

Honestly? You’re not alone. I hear this all the time from PhD students—“What are paradigms, and which one am I supposed to pick?”

So today, we’re going to break it down. And I mean really break it down. No jargon. No overcomplicated theory. Just a simple, relatable explanation to help you figure out what’s what.

Oh, and I’m Dr Elizabeth Yardley—nice to meet you if we haven’t crossed paths yet. I help PhD students get out of their own way, make sense of this process, and actually finish their doctorate without losing their minds in the process. Paradigms are one of those things that can feel like a huge block, so let’s knock that out of the way today.

Before we get stuck in, if you’re curious to learn more about paradigms and want something you can refer back to later, I’ve got a free Quick Start Guide to Paradigms you can download. It covers what we’re going through here (plus a bit more), here’s the link. Go grab it!

Paradigms Starter Kit - click here to get yours!

What is a research paradigm?

And why should you care?

A research paradigm is basically your research worldview. It’s the set of beliefs and assumptions that shape how you see knowledge, how you think research should be done, and what you believe counts as “truth.”

Still sounding a bit abstract? Don’t worry—you’re not alone in thinking that. Let’s look at it a different way.

Imagine you and a friend are trying to decide where to go for dinner. You’ve found a restaurant you like the look of, but you want to do a bit more digging before you book a table. You say, “Let’s check their hygiene rating, the chef’s credentials, and the ingredient sourcing—that’ll give us an objective sense of whether it’s good.” Your friend says, “Let’s ask around and see if anyone we know has eaten there. What did they think of it?”

Same question. Two totally different approaches to finding the answer.

And that’s what paradigms do in research. They shape what you think is important, how you gather information, and what you believe counts as valid knowledge.

Still with me? Good. Because now we’re going to make it even easier to digest (pun absolutely intended). We’re sticking with food, and I’m going to explain the five main research paradigms by comparing them to different cooking styles.

Positivism: The strict recipe follower

Let’s start with Positivism, the classic.

Positivism is like following a recipe to the letter. You’re weighing every ingredient on a scale, setting timers for exact cooking times, and expecting to produce something 100% replicable. If you and ten other people all follow the instructions exactly, you should all end up with the same dish.

In research, Positivism is all about objectivity, measurable facts, and finding the answer. It’s scientific and methodical. You’re collecting quantifiable data—think things like hours worked, test scores, survey results, and your focus is on facts rather than feelings.

Post-Positivism: The recipe follower with a healthy dose of realism

Next up is Post-Positivism. You’re still following the recipe, but you’ve realised life isn’t that perfect. Maybe your oven runs a bit hot, maybe your flour absorbs more moisture than the recipe writer’s did. So you adjust—just a little—to account for those things.

Post-Positivism acknowledges that while you’re striving for objectivity, perfection isn’t really possible. There’s always going to be some bias, some margin of error. In research terms, you’re still collecting measurable data, but you’re being transparent about the limitations and recognising that research doesn’t happen in a vacuum.

Interpretivism: Cooking without a recipe

Now we get to Interpretivism, and this is where things get creative.

Interpretivism is like cooking without a recipe. You’re tasting as you go, adding a bit of this, a dash of that, maybe asking whoever’s at the table, “What do you think—does it need more garlic?” It’s intuitive, it’s responsive, and no two versions of the dish are exactly the same.

In research, Interpretivism is all about exploring lived experiences and personal perspectives. You’re conducting interviews, running focus groups, digging into people’s stories and how they make sense of the world. Everyone’s reality is different, and that’s exactly what you’re interested in uncovering.

Critical Realism: Asking why certain ingredients are in the dish

Let’s take it deeper with Critical Realism.

Here, you’re not just cooking—you’re thinking about why you’re using these particular ingredients. Why does this culture favour these spices? What’s the historical or societal reason behind this method of preparation?

Critical Realism acknowledges that there is a reality out there, but how we experience it is shaped by deeper structures—social, cultural, economic. In research, it’s about going beyond the surface and asking why things are the way they are. You’re not just looking at what’s happening; you’re exploring the forces beneath it.

Pragmatism: Doing what works (and getting dinner on the table)

And finally, we’ve got Pragmatism, which is probably my favourite—because who doesn’t love a bit of flexibility?

Pragmatism is like walking into the kitchen and saying, “Right, what have I got? How can I make this work?” Maybe you’re using a recipe for the base but adding your own twist, or you’re combining cooking methods to get the best result.

In research, Pragmatism is all about what works. You’re mixing methods—maybe running a survey and conducting interviews—because you want a well-rounded understanding. It’s practical, adaptable, and focused on solving real-world problems rather than sticking to one strict way of doing things.

Quick Recap: Five research paradigms, five cooking styles

So, there you have it.

• Positivism is your strict recipe follower.

• Post-Positivism allows a little wiggle room.

• Interpretivism is all about creativity and tasting as you go.

• Critical Realism asks why this dish is made the way it is.

• Pragmatism just wants to get dinner on the table, however that happens.

Each of these paradigms has its place, and none of them is better than the others. It’s about choosing the one that makes the most sense for your research question, your approach, and what you’re trying to find out.

Ready to take the next step?

If you found this helpful—and I hope you did!—don’t forget to download my Free Paradigms Starter Kit. It breaks all of this down even further and gives you a handy reference to keep coming back to as you plan and write your thesis.

It’s totally free, and you can grab it right now using this link: Paradigms Starter Kit.

Social science research paradigms starter kit - tap here to grab it!