Types of PhD researchers in current world

Positivist, Interpretive, and Critical Research

Why I see myself as a Positivist Researcher(PR):

I see myself as a Positivist researcher because of the following facts,

1      I prefer dealing with quantitative data, surveys, accurate experiments on the subject matter and using statistical tool which will be appropriate for my research.

2.      I prefer to do a systematic research combining empirical observation and deductive logic.

3.      I feel that everything needs to be seen through a scientific lens.

4.      To derive at a pattern I would use scientific tools/methods, surveys to arrive at the data set and statistical analysis.

5.      I rely on known and observable scientific facts.

Why I see myself as a Interpretive Researcher(IR):

I see myself as a Interpretive researcher because of the following facts,

1.      I would focus on understanding subjective experiences rather than simply observing facts as a positivist.

2.      As a interpretive researcher I would emphasize on conducting  a very close, detailed reading of the subject matter to arrive at a deep understanding.

3.      In addition to observable scientific facts I would use my common sense for my research.

4.      As a IR I strongly feel both scientific laws and common sense are important to carry out a research in their respective domain

5.      As a IR I would I always find a answer to the question “HOW” rather going by the scientific and observable facts.

Why I see myself as a Critical Researcher(CR):

I see myself as a Interpretive researcher because of the following facts,

1.      As a CR I take a neutral approach, I would use multiple layers in my research work.

2.      The multiple layers include, empirical, real and actual.

3.      As a CR I feel that scientific observations, empirical data and inner feeling/commonsense alone is not enough to carry out a research.

4.      I strongly feel that knowledge is power

5.      As a CR I don’t want to be a rational decision maker.

Difference Between PR, IR and CR

S.No	PR	IR	CR
1	Quantitative data, Surveys and structural experiments	Common sense, inner feelings and qualitative data	Knowledge is Power
2	Scientific tools/methods, surveys to arrive at the data set and statistical analysis	How analysis	Neutral Approach
3	Narrow approach	Localized, Microlevel and short term approach	Broader and long term structural approach
4	Single layer research methodology	Single layer research methodology	CR states that research consist of multiple layers
5	Aim of PR is to prove the fact	Aim of IR is to answer how and why	Aim is to empower

Conclusion:

I see myself as a CRITICAL RESEARCHER because,

1.      I feel knowledge is power and the end result of a research is just not to prove facts rather empower.

2.      I don’t want to stick to a narrow, localized, micro-level, short term approach and I feel my research should be multilayered, both qualitative and quantitative in nature.

3.      As a CR I feel we can observe  empirical reality using our senses and our personal experiences with the empirical reality is always not pure, neither neutral nor unmediated.

4.      As a CR I feel both PR and IR are rational decision makers and their decisions are always not pure in nature.

5.      As a CR I reject both PR and IR as their views are detached and concerned only with studying the problem instead of providing solution or acting on it.
h
Here in Lockeys, www.lockeys.in , we provide the best Phd Proposal, Thesis writing, publication in Scopus, SCI and Annexure-1 support in chennai, TamilNadu