Positivism vs Post Positivism
What’s the difference between positivism and post positivism?
Why does it matter? How different are positivist and post positivist studies?
Ever wondered about the difference between positivism and post-positivism? Or how each could shape your research? You're not alone! Paradigms can be a big sticking point for PhD students, and getting clear on where your research fits within these frameworks can be a game-changer.
Hi! I’m Dr. Elizabeth Yardley. After two decades of guiding PhD students through the labyrinth that is the doctoral journey, I'm here to help you break through the paradigm puzzle and get out of your own way to complete your PhD. Today, we’re diving into two foundational paradigms - positivism and post-positivism - and exploring how each could impact your research project.
Let’s start with a quick overview.
What is positivism?
Positivism emerged in the early 19th century, influenced heavily by the natural sciences like biology, chemistry, and physics. Positivists argue that the only reliable knowledge is what we can observe and measure. The idea here is that we can study the social world as objectively as scientists study the physical world.
Positivism is all about quantifiable data. The researcher’s role is to observe and measure the world as objectively as possible. The aim? To uncover universal truths or "laws" about social phenomena, much like scientists discover laws in physics or chemistry.
Positivist researchers love quantitative methods—surveys, experiments, and anything that yields numbers they can analyse statistically. The goal is to remain as neutral as possible, so any other researcher could replicate the study and get the same results.
In other words, positivism views reality as an objective, measurable entity independent of the researcher’s perspective. But as we’ll see, post-positivism takes a slightly different approach.
What is post-positivism?
While positivism is all about precision, post-positivism brings in a bit more caution and flexibility. Post-positivists still believe in using observable, empirical evidence, but they also recognise that researchers aren’t perfectly objective and that our findings can’t capture reality in a perfectly neutral way.
Unlike positivists, post-positivists accept that all research is influenced by the researcher’s beliefs, biases, and cultural background. We can strive for objectivity, but it’s impossible to achieve it completely. Instead of searching for absolute truths, post-positivism aims to develop temporary understandings of complex social realities. This paradigm often incorporates a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods, aiming to provide a fuller, more nuanced picture of the research topic.
In short, post-positivism values both empirical data and contextual understanding. It embraces the idea that while we can get closer to understanding reality, there will always be a degree of uncertainty.
Positivism vs. post-positivism - key differences
Although both paradigms rely on empirical evidence, they diverge in significant ways:
Nature of Reality
Positivism sees reality as objective and independent of the observer.
Post-positivism suggests that reality can only be partially understood, acknowledging the influence of the researcher on what’s observed.
Role of the Researcher
In positivism, the researcher is a detached, objective observer.
In post-positivism, the researcher’s influence is recognised, and steps are taken to account for personal biases.
Research Methods
Positivism typically favors quantitative methods.
Post-positivism welcomes both quantitative and qualitative methods, aiming for a comprehensive understanding of the topic.
Goals of Research
Positivism seeks universal laws or truths.
Post-positivism aims for a more nuanced understanding of specific contexts, with the acceptance that findings are always open to revision.
Applying these paradigms: example project
Let’s say you’re researching the experiences of first-time mothers returning to corporate jobs in finance and looking at their ability to secure leadership positions on projects. Your approach would differ based on whether you’re working within a positivist or post-positivist paradigm.
A positivist approach
With positivism, you might start with a hypothesis like, “First-time mothers returning to work are less likely to secure leadership roles than colleagues without children.” You’d focus on gathering quantitative data to test this. For instance, you could analyse company records from finance firms to compare the leadership positions offered to returning mothers versus colleagues without children. This approach would aim to produce measurable, statistically significant results, contributing to a general understanding of career barriers for working mothers in finance.
While this method offers clear, objective insights, it may miss the unique experiences and perceptions of these mothers, which can be equally important in understanding the full picture.
A post-positivist approach
In contrast, a post-positivist approach would take a more holistic view. Here, you might still gather quantitative data but combine it with qualitative methods - perhaps interviews or focus groups with returning mothers to understand their perspectives on leadership opportunities. You’d explore the influence of workplace culture, company policies, and the personal challenges these women face, acknowledging that your findings are context-dependent.
Rather than making broad generalisations, you’d aim to understand how and why some mothers can secure leadership roles while others can’t. This approach provides a richer, more comprehensive understanding of the issue but may lack the definitive, replicable results found in a purely positivist study.
Wrapping up: positivism vs. post-positivism
In the end, each paradigm has its strengths and challenges. Positivism offers clarity, objectivity, and the chance to uncover universal laws, but it may oversimplify complex social issues. Post-positivism embraces the messiness of real life, recognising that human experiences are multifaceted and context-dependent, yet it sacrifices some degree of certainty and generalisability.
Want to learn more? Try Paradigms for Beginners!
This course offers a clear, jargon-free introduction to five key research paradigms: positivism, post-positivism, interpretivism, critical realism, and pragmatism. Designed for PhD students and ambitious masters degree students, this course simplifies complex concepts, helping you to get confident with paradigms.