Paradigm in the research : classic paradigm, constructivist, & critical

Chapter. 1

This article will explain what is the Paradigms in the research especially the research in communication studies, what is the element in the paradigm and what is the difference of the element in each paradigm.

Chapter. 2

 Paradigm and Various Paradigms in research: Definition and differences

Paradigms by experts are grouped in very diverse groupings. In this article I am only presenting a grouping based on Guba and Lincoln (1994) Positivism, Post positivism, Constructivism and Critical theories. (Egon G Guba, 1994) And for the simplification a number of scientists classify it into 3: Classical Paradigm (positivism dan post positivism), Critical Paradigm dan Constructivism Paradigm. 

Classic Paradigm	Constructive Paradigm	Critical Paradigm
Placing social science equal to natural science & Physic and as an organized method for finding deductive logic with empirical observations, to probabilistically discover or confirm causal law that can be used to predict general patterns of certain social phenomena	View social science as a systematic analysis of socially meaningful action through direct observation and detail of social actors in natural daily seetings in order to be able to understand and interpret how social actors concerned create and manage their social world. (their social)	Defining social science as a process that critically seeks to "reveal the real structure" behind illusions, false needs, represented in the material world, with the aim of helping to enlighten  human beings To improve and change the life.

Paradigms as a theoretical perspective have several dimensions.

Figure: 4 elements in the paradigm (O'Brien, 2019)

If you look at the picture of the paradigm above and the dimensions it formed, we can identify the difference between paradigms in the tables below. Identification in these tables is a summary of some thoughts and several studies. : (Egon G Guba, 1994), (Crotty, 1998), (Denzin, 1994) (Hidayat, 2002)

1.Ontological	Related to the assumption of the object or social reality studied -what is the nature of reality-
2.Epistemological	Regarding assumptions related to the relationship between researchers and research objects in the process of acquiring knowledge about the objects studied-what is the nature of relationship between the inquirer and knowable-
3.Metodological	Assumptions about how to acquire knowledge about an object of knowledge. -How should the inquirer go about finding out knowledge-
4.Axiological	Related to the position of value judgement, ethics, and moral choices researchers in a study-what is the role of values-

We can identify the difference in each dimension for each paradigms as explained below:

1.      Ontological Dimension (assumptions of objects/social realities))
Classic Paradigm	There is a real reality governed by certain rules that are universal; Although the truth may only be obtained probabilistically. -CRITICAL REALISM-
Critical Paradigm	The observed reality is a virtual reality that has been shaped by historical processes and social, cultural and political economic forces. -HISTORICAL REALISM-
Constructivism	Reality is a social construct. The truth of a reality is relative, applicable in a specific context that is considered relevant by social actors. -RELATIVISM-
2.       Epistemological Dimension (nature relationship between inquirer and knowable)
Classic Paradigm	There is an objective reality, as an external reality outside of the researcher. Researchers should be as far away as possible to distance the object of the study. - DUALIST/OBJECTIVIST-
Critical Paradigm	The researcher's relationship with the object of the study is always contacted with certain values. Understanding reality is value mediated findings -TRANSACTIONALIST/SUBJECTIVIST-
Constructivism	Understanding a reality or findings in research is the product of the researcher's interaction with the object being examined. TRANSACTIONALIST/SUBJECTIVIST-
3.      Methodological Dimension (how should the inquirer go about finding knowledge)
Classic Paradigm	Hypothesis testing in the structure of the hypothetic-deductive method; through experimental laboratories or explanatory surveys, with quantitative analysis. -INTERVENTIONIST- Research quality criteria: Objectivity, Reliability, Validity (internal and external)
Critical Paradigm	Promote comprehensive, contextual, and multi-level analysis conducted through self-placement as an activist / participant in the process of social transformation. -PARTICIPATIVE- Research quality criteria: Historical situatedness: whether research concerns historical, social, cultural, economic and political contexts.
Constructivism	Emphasize empathy, and dialectical interactions between researchers-respondents to reconstruct the reality studied, through qualitative methods such as participant observation. - REFLECTIVE/DIALECTICAL- Research quality criteria: Authenticity and reflectivity:  whether the findings are an authentic reflection of the reality experienced by social actors.
4.      Axiological Dimension (what is the role of values)
Classic Paradigm	Values, ethics and moral choices must be outside the research process. Researcher must position himself as a disinterested scientist Research objectives: Explanation, prediction, and social reality control Researchers are placed as: OBSERVER
Critical Paradigm	Values, ethics, and moral choices are integral parts of research. Research aims as a social critic, encouraging transformation, emancipation and social empowerment. Researcher positions himself as transformative intellectual, advocate and ACTIVITIST
Constructivism	Values, ethics and moral choices are also integral parts of research. Research aims for dialectical reconstruction of social reality Researchers position themselves as passionate participants, FACILITATORS  who connect the diversity of social actors.

Chapter. 3 Conclusion

Research method is inseparable from the paradigm or theoretical perspective used in a study. Each paradigm differs in several dimensions specifically in some aspect (ontological, epistemological, methodological and axiological) these differences then automatically bring the consequence that the quality of a research will have different criteria for each paradigm or theoretical perspective used in the research. The use of certain paradigms also brings the next consequences on researchers because each paradigm is based on epistemology, theoretical perspectives, variants of research methodology, including goodness  criteria that will determine the quality of research. This will facilitate research and provide integrative direction so that researchers can conduct research properly and provide impactful results.

The initial affirmation of the paradigm used in research is also to avoid errors and debates in assessing research results. There is no true paradigm, all have their own points of view and assumptions and cannot be compared to each other (incommensurable). Lastly I would like to quote Lindolf's opinion, 1995;

“…..paradigms are incommensurable. That is the assumptions and explanations of two or more paradigms within a given discipline are so different that they cannot be compared by means of an independent value system. Thus, adherence to one paradigm forecloses the possibility of the acceptance of competing one” (Lindlof, 1995)

References :

Crotty, M. (1998). The Foundation of Social research : Meaning and Perspective in the research process. Sage Publications Ltd.

Denzin, N. K. (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research. LOndon: Sage Publication.

Egon G Guba, Y. S. (1994). Handbook of Qualitative research.

Hidayat, D. N. (2002). Metodologi Penelitian dalam sebuah "Multi-Paradigm Science". Mediator Jurnal Komunikasi.

Lindlof, T. (1995). Qualitative Communication Research methods. New Delhi: Sage Publication.

O'Brien, R. (2019). My Turakawaewae: A Review of Learning. research gate, 15.