Yes, Yes, Yes!! well done. Very clear and practical explanation. The analogy works well ! You are right...its helpful in remembering...thanks a lot! Great content...
I’m so glad to hear that! Making these concepts clear and accessible is my goal. Thank you for watching, and I’m happy it’s helping you understand. Let me know if there are other topics you’d like me to cover!
Another incredible video Liz. The analagy of high school cliques works very well. I'll be using this for teaching - of course credting you and signpositing students to this channel.
This is so lovely to read! I'm pleased you've found our channel too, welcome to Degree Doctor! Be sure to sign up to our free weekly emails, which are also full of tips and advice. If you use this link, you can grab a couple of free planners too! www.thedegreedoctor.com/free-dissertation-pdfs
Hi. Thank you for the explanation. I have been lost in these theoretical things for quite a long time. You showed the most sensible path out of the long-term confusion.
Thank you for your kind words! Great question! Critical Realism and Pragmatism both deal with the nature of reality and how we can know it, but they approach it differently. Critical Realism says there is a reality independent of our perceptions, but our understanding of it is always partial and mediated by social, cultural, and historical contexts. Pragmatism, on the other hand, focuses on what "works" in practice, emphasising practical outcomes and utility over philosophical concerns about reality. In short, while Critical Realism is about uncovering the structures underlying social phenomena, Pragmatism is more about adapting your methods and frameworks to achieve practical results. Both are valuable, depending on the aims of your research! Also, I have a video about Pragmatism coming out on Monday, 7 October, so keep an eye out for that! 😊
Thanks so much for this video! I’m doing research in Practical Theology and Critical Realism is the paradigm of my choice. I believe that Hermeneutic Phenomenology fits well within this paradigm. Thoughts?
Thank you for your comment! Critical Realism is a fascinating paradigm, and it’s great to hear you’ve chosen it for your research in Practical Theology. Hermeneutic Phenomenology can align well within Critical Realism if you’re focusing on understanding the lived experiences of individuals while grounding them in the broader structures and mechanisms that shape those experiences. It allows for a deeper exploration of meaning while acknowledging the layered reality Critical Realism emphasises. Best of luck with your research - your approach sounds compelling! Team Degree Doctor
This is the best-ever explanation on this topic. I'm incredibly grateful. Question: Can you use Critical Realism with Pure Qualitative Research or you must use Mixed Methods? Many thanks in advance.
Thank you so much for your kind words! I’m glad you found the explanation helpful. As for your question, the answer is-it depends. Critical realism is an approach that can be applied to both qualitative and mixed methods research, depending on the nature of your research questions and objectives. If your research is purely qualitative, you can certainly use critical realism to guide your approach. It’s all about how you structure your study, the type of data you collect, and how you interpret your findings. Critical realism allows you to explore the underlying structures and mechanisms that influence the phenomena you’re studying, which can be done effectively with qualitative methods. However, some researchers choose to use mixed methods because it allows them to combine the strengths of both qualitative and quantitative approaches, which can provide a more comprehensive understanding of complex issues. Whether or not you need to use mixed methods will largely depend on what you’re aiming to uncover in your research. Certainly worth discussing with your supervisors.
Hello Elizabeth :) I have a question about epistemological stances and traditions that I really hope you can help me answer! My research question is: How has the Danish News media coverage of the Russia-Ukraine war currently influenced social attitudes toward Ukrainians and Russians among the Danish public? I'm thinking of doing a discourse analysis of the media coverage and then a survey of the Danish public's social attitude. - I'm guessing it's interpretivism, but could it also be critical realism? Or hermeneutics? I really hope you can help me, since you are the only one who can sort of make me understand it :)
Hi there! 😊 Your research sounds fascinating, and you’re definitely asking the right questions to clarify your epistemological stance. With a focus on understanding how media coverage shapes social attitudes, you’re primarily leaning towards an interpretivist approach, as it seeks to explore and interpret the meanings, beliefs, and attitudes held by the Danish public in relation to the media discourse. Interpretivism is well-suited for studying subjective interpretations and social meanings, especially when using methods like discourse analysis and surveys to capture people’s attitudes. Hermeneutics could also be relevant here, especially if you’re focusing deeply on interpreting the texts and uncovering layers of meaning in the discourse. Hermeneutics would allow you to delve into the contextual and cultural nuances of media language and its implications on public attitudes. Critical realism could apply if you are not only interested in interpreting meanings but also in uncovering underlying causal mechanisms - for example, if you’re looking to identify systemic influences within the media that shape public perception. Critical realism could support an analysis that aims to reveal the structures and power dynamics influencing the media coverage and, subsequently, public attitudes. Given your research question, a combination of interpretivism and hermeneutics might suit best, but if you’re drawn to exploring underlying social structures, then critical realism could be valuable as well. I hope this helps clarify things! Let me know if you’d like to explore any of these stances further. 😊
@@DegreeDoctor Thank you so much for your answer! You are a life saver :) If I try to correlate the findings of my discourse analysis with theories on media influence/framing and social attitude formation. Would that make it critical realism? Or is it still more on the interpretivist/hermenutic side?
You're so welcome! 😊 If you're looking to correlate your discourse analysis findings with established theories on media influence, framing, and social attitude formation, you’re certainly moving towards a more analytical approach that could align with critical realism. This is because critical realism allows for examining both observed patterns (like attitudes) and underlying mechanisms (like media framing) that influence these patterns, aiming to understand the 'real' structures shaping social perceptions. However, if your primary aim remains to interpret meanings and subjective understandings within the media and public response, then the interpretivist/hermeneutic stance is still a strong fit. Adding theoretical frameworks doesn’t shift your stance to critical realism by itself; rather, it depends on whether you’re seeking to reveal causal mechanisms or simply to interpret relationships. In short: if you're exploring the “why” and “how” behind these influences in a structural sense, critical realism fits well. If you’re more focused on interpreting the social meanings within the discourse and attitudes, sticking with interpretivism/hermeneutics would be effective.
Finally! An explanation that makes sense.
Thank you, Liz. 😊
I’m so thrilled to read this! Great to hear it helped!
Yes, Yes, Yes!! well done. Very clear and practical explanation. The analogy works well ! You are right...its helpful in remembering...thanks a lot! Great content...
Thanks so much for your kind words, glad you enjoyed the video!
Thank you! This really helps me in my Communication Pedagogy Grad class.
Glad it was helpful!
Really helpful!😀
So glad you found it helpful! 😊
Thank you so much 😊
You're welcome 😊 Let me know if you have any questions!
Bravo! Such a great walkthrough. Thank you for the simplicity and relatable concrete examples :-)
You’re very welcome! So glad you enjoyed it!
Finally, someone is explaining in English!!! Now I get it.
I’m so glad to hear that! Making these concepts clear and accessible is my goal. Thank you for watching, and I’m happy it’s helping you understand. Let me know if there are other topics you’d like me to cover!
Thank you - A simple, great explanation about paradigms and how it relates to the researcher!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Another incredible video Liz. The analagy of high school cliques works very well. I'll be using this for teaching - of course credting you and signpositing students to this channel.
I’m so pleased to hear it was helpful! I do love an analogy! 🤓
Just started my phd and just found this channel - thank you this is such a great channel
This is so lovely to read! I'm pleased you've found our channel too, welcome to Degree Doctor! Be sure to sign up to our free weekly emails, which are also full of tips and advice. If you use this link, you can grab a couple of free planners too!
www.thedegreedoctor.com/free-dissertation-pdfs
Excellent discussion and real world example that makes a lot of sense.
Thank you! I’m so pleased you liked it! 🤓
This is such a great video! Clear and concise! I can now think through my PhD proposal a lot more clearly! Thank you!
You're so welcome! I’m pleased you found it helpful!
Super helpful thank you!!
You're so welcome! Glad it was useful!
Hi. Thank you for the explanation. I have been lost in these theoretical things for quite a long time. You showed the most sensible path out of the long-term confusion.
I’m so pleased this was helpful, theory can be tough! 🤓
Amazing that makes sense!
☺
Thanks refreshes my memory
You're very welcome, I'm glad you found it helpful :-)
Thanks Liz
No worries! 🤓
Thank you, very helpful
You’re very welcome! ☺️
Thank you for a fantastic video. How does critical realism compare with pragmatism please?
Thank you for your kind words! Great question! Critical Realism and Pragmatism both deal with the nature of reality and how we can know it, but they approach it differently. Critical Realism says there is a reality independent of our perceptions, but our understanding of it is always partial and mediated by social, cultural, and historical contexts. Pragmatism, on the other hand, focuses on what "works" in practice, emphasising practical outcomes and utility over philosophical concerns about reality. In short, while Critical Realism is about uncovering the structures underlying social phenomena, Pragmatism is more about adapting your methods and frameworks to achieve practical results. Both are valuable, depending on the aims of your research!
Also, I have a video about Pragmatism coming out on Monday, 7 October, so keep an eye out for that! 😊
it was great experience of this video how you teach complex concepts in easy language. thank you so much.
You are most welcome!
@@DegreeDoctor 😊🙏
This was so helpful, thank you 😊.
I’m so happy to read your comment and really pleased the video was helpful!
Thank you
You’re very welcome! ☺️
thank you so much for this video
You’re very welcome! ☺️
Thanks so much for this video! I’m doing research in Practical Theology and Critical Realism is the paradigm of my choice. I believe that Hermeneutic Phenomenology fits well within this paradigm. Thoughts?
Thank you for your comment! Critical Realism is a fascinating paradigm, and it’s great to hear you’ve chosen it for your research in Practical Theology. Hermeneutic Phenomenology can align well within Critical Realism if you’re focusing on understanding the lived experiences of individuals while grounding them in the broader structures and mechanisms that shape those experiences. It allows for a deeper exploration of meaning while acknowledging the layered reality Critical Realism emphasises. Best of luck with your research - your approach sounds compelling!
Team Degree Doctor
What about pragmatism?
Pragmtaism video is on the way next week - drops Monday 7th October!
This is the best-ever explanation on this topic. I'm incredibly grateful. Question: Can you use Critical Realism with Pure Qualitative Research or you must use Mixed Methods? Many thanks in advance.
Thank you so much for your kind words! I’m glad you found the explanation helpful.
As for your question, the answer is-it depends. Critical realism is an approach that can be applied to both qualitative and mixed methods research, depending on the nature of your research questions and objectives.
If your research is purely qualitative, you can certainly use critical realism to guide your approach. It’s all about how you structure your study, the type of data you collect, and how you interpret your findings. Critical realism allows you to explore the underlying structures and mechanisms that influence the phenomena you’re studying, which can be done effectively with qualitative methods.
However, some researchers choose to use mixed methods because it allows them to combine the strengths of both qualitative and quantitative approaches, which can provide a more comprehensive understanding of complex issues. Whether or not you need to use mixed methods will largely depend on what you’re aiming to uncover in your research.
Certainly worth discussing with your supervisors.
Hello Elizabeth :) I have a question about epistemological stances and traditions that I really hope you can help me answer!
My research question is: How has the Danish News media coverage of the Russia-Ukraine war currently influenced social attitudes toward Ukrainians and Russians among the Danish public?
I'm thinking of doing a discourse analysis of the media coverage and then a survey of the Danish public's social attitude.
- I'm guessing it's interpretivism, but could it also be critical realism? Or hermeneutics?
I really hope you can help me, since you are the only one who can sort of make me understand it :)
Hi there! 😊 Your research sounds fascinating, and you’re definitely asking the right questions to clarify your epistemological stance.
With a focus on understanding how media coverage shapes social attitudes, you’re primarily leaning towards an interpretivist approach, as it seeks to explore and interpret the meanings, beliefs, and attitudes held by the Danish public in relation to the media discourse. Interpretivism is well-suited for studying subjective interpretations and social meanings, especially when using methods like discourse analysis and surveys to capture people’s attitudes.
Hermeneutics could also be relevant here, especially if you’re focusing deeply on interpreting the texts and uncovering layers of meaning in the discourse. Hermeneutics would allow you to delve into the contextual and cultural nuances of media language and its implications on public attitudes.
Critical realism could apply if you are not only interested in interpreting meanings but also in uncovering underlying causal mechanisms - for example, if you’re looking to identify systemic influences within the media that shape public perception. Critical realism could support an analysis that aims to reveal the structures and power dynamics influencing the media coverage and, subsequently, public attitudes.
Given your research question, a combination of interpretivism and hermeneutics might suit best, but if you’re drawn to exploring underlying social structures, then critical realism could be valuable as well.
I hope this helps clarify things! Let me know if you’d like to explore any of these stances further. 😊
@@DegreeDoctor Thank you so much for your answer! You are a life saver :) If I try to correlate the findings of my discourse analysis with theories on media influence/framing and social attitude formation. Would that make it critical realism? Or is it still more on the interpretivist/hermenutic side?
You're so welcome! 😊 If you're looking to correlate your discourse analysis findings with established theories on media influence, framing, and social attitude formation, you’re certainly moving towards a more analytical approach that could align with critical realism. This is because critical realism allows for examining both observed patterns (like attitudes) and underlying mechanisms (like media framing) that influence these patterns, aiming to understand the 'real' structures shaping social perceptions.
However, if your primary aim remains to interpret meanings and subjective understandings within the media and public response, then the interpretivist/hermeneutic stance is still a strong fit. Adding theoretical frameworks doesn’t shift your stance to critical realism by itself; rather, it depends on whether you’re seeking to reveal causal mechanisms or simply to interpret relationships.
In short: if you're exploring the “why” and “how” behind these influences in a structural sense, critical realism fits well. If you’re more focused on interpreting the social meanings within the discourse and attitudes, sticking with interpretivism/hermeneutics would be effective.
@@DegreeDoctor Thank you so much for your detailed answers, I really appreciate it! I wish you a wonderful Sunday! 🌞
This was so useful thank you so much!
Glad it was helpful! Do feel free to reach out if you have any questions!