from conception to coherence: the determination of correct research ‘posture’

(First 300 words) Introduction (from conception to philosophy): The first article in this series provided a brief conceptual understanding of research. It postulated that the many ways of acquiring knowledge included tradition, authority, logical reasoning, experience, intuition, borrowing and the scientific method. Of these, the scientific method is the most sophisticated and reliable. It is this sophistication, in the form of research philosophy and methodological paradigms that is the object of this article. How data are collected and interpreted depends on how one conceives of the “world” and its knowledge constructs, as scientific inquiry is defined not at the level of the methodology but at the level of the paradigm. This paradigmatic framing of research activity and philosophical posturing of the researcher provides the external coherence prerequisite of scientific research. Alternative research paradigms that determine ‘posture’: In seeking an epistemological position (how we come to know), one needs to also consider the ontological lens (world view) and methodological paradigm most befitting the aims and objectives of the study. To determine the appropriate “posture” 1, some factors against which the alternative inquiry paradigms may be compared include: the nature of the knowledge sought, ways in which knowledge is accumulated (and accommodated), quality criteria and ethics.2 To demonstrate reflexivity and appropriateness of choice for a study, the paradigms positivism, interpretivism and critical theory are appraised against some of the factors mentioned above. Only fundamental dilemmas are discussed below. To contextualize the above paradigms and facilitate understanding, the topic of inter-personal violence prevention will be used as this is a global phenomenon burdening health care.3–5 To answer the research question: “What are the reciprocal meanings for inter-personal violence and emergency medicine?”, the further question is: “What is the paradigm that will best inform the researcher’s posture toward this question?”