The Link between Social Theory and Qualitative Social Research

The study traces the underlying social theoretical framework in social qualitative social research. It locates the social theory from the role of social theory, philosophy, approaches, methodologies, paradigms, and critical theory of research. By general analysing the fundamental of each idea, the literature focuses on the identifying the social theoretical perspectives generally include in conducting qualitative social research. The final result of the study will resume how the social theory is linked to qualitative social research.

The use of qualitative approaches in social studies has been familiar among researchers as the practical methods to deepen their understanding about social phenomena. Consequently, studying social theory has become a point of issue as the importance concern of qualitative social research to gather detailed and complex information. When conducting the research, social theory is often needed to encompass the researcher’s personal ideas regarding to experience, knowledge, the nature of reality, and human activities into the qualitative research process (Tavallaei 2010, p.573). So far, social theory is proved as a framework based on approaches and stages related to societies phenomena such as education status, economic structure, power, and gender to control the work in terms of subjectivity. 

  Sica (1998, p.172) iterated that researchers used social theory only “when envisioned or embodied, as an imaginative enterprise for social changes”. Still, researchers feel constrained by the disadvantages of the position of social qualitative researches, “the concept of objectivity of scholarship was temporary since there are limitations in self-evident, transparent, be as non-arbitrary” (Sica 1998, p.172). Thus, one of the challenges which has been persistently raised as a question is what are the social theoretical perspectives that should be used in qualitative social research? Likewise, establishing clear position of social theory in the case of qualitative social research is important to opening up the key social theoretical perspectives as a guide to incorporate inter-relevant concepts between social theory and qualitative social research. Although there is basically no clear agreement to support how are the relations between social theory to the way of conducting qualitative social research (May 2001, p.43), there are different key ideas to answer based on philosophy, approaches, methodologies, paradigms, and critical theory of research.

As for the objective of social theory, Willis et al (2007, p.439) stated that social theory points out the social ranges of human activities and beliefs such as arguing how they act, communicate between individuals and others which generated by social structure. Meanwhile, qualitative research refers to “the exploration of human experience, perceptions, motivations and behaviours” and it focuses in the collection and words analysis such as speech or writing (Clisset 2008 cited in Tavallaei 2010, p.571). Thus, it can be stated that qualitative social research covers a social context of those qualitative approaches. 

As a general starting point, there is inter-related between the type of data and social research. It is important to distinct between how quantitative and qualitative in addressing social phenomena. The simply definition is quantitative corresponds to numerical while qualitative corresponds to non-numerical. It might quantify data by scoring and comparing social experience items in numerical scale. On the other hand, one might wants to describe the phenomena completely so the qualitative is preferred. There will be less meaning in quantitative and there will be difficult to generalise objectively in qualitative. Accordingly, generally there is no better type of data than another. Social research can be use both quantitative and qualitative as it research proposes. Nevertheless in qualitative social research, it is inevitable that researchers must align with “idiographic explanations” instead of “nomothetic explanations” which is normally easy in quantitative (Babbie 2010, p.25). The idiographic explanation can only be enhanced when researchers understand completely if they conduct directly to their subjects. Thus idiographic explanation is as a key in strengthening researcher‘s understanding about the nature of human social life.

Next, to build paradigm, the togetherness of ontological and epistemological philosophy in qualitative social research is required. The term of paradigm refers to theoretical perspective. Mack (2010,p.6) mentioned that “ontology is what we mean when we say something while epistemology is what we mean when we say we know something”. Likewise, ontological assumption is used to inform epistemological assumption, and they together benefit to raise theoretical perspective or paradigm (Crotty 1998, p.10). Then, methodologies and methods are needed to put into the research questions. That is how one constructs the paradigm, methodology, methods, and research question will affect how the research goes. When conducting qualitative social research the discussion is now about social science, different from natural science which says something truth. Social research considers about social world that does not always present by means unless there are claims to argue by the research (May 2001, p.9). Still, the subject matter of social science is not natural phenomena but about social life in which people, thus include the social researches, are clearly fundamental to what we understand social life (May 2001, p.9). In addition, the social theory should different from philosophy or belief, truth, and knowledge (Babbie 2010, p.28). Yet, social theory relates to ideas, well-defined concept, and techniques of analysis about issues in social life (Harrington 2005, p.6). Understanding philosophical underpinnings in qualitative social research, wherefore, is essential to relate and interpret social phenomena and behaviour and, finally, reflect how the researchers and research go. 

In the process of research, it is important to consider how the procedure of testing theory is developed. Two ways are known as deduction and induction. While deduction is finding theories before research and aims to get empirical evident to receive or refuse theories, induction means generate theory of social activities based on research findings (May 2001, p.32).  According to Babbie (2010, p.23), deduction process lets the researchers move from logical or theoretical pattern to observations to prove whether the pattern happens. Conversely, induction process tests researcher’s logical reasoning. In qualitative research, a researcher does not have a theory which is stated in hypothesis through a deductive method but a researcher only has a little information and relevant theory about the topic (Johnson 2008, p.35). Consequently, a social researcher must intend to establish their relevant theory with the topic through an inductive method. Researchers only can build theory according to the evidence of social life which taken empirically and not falsifying. However, May (2001, p.33) argued that in fact researchers can use deduction as long as the ideas about social life is something ‘true’. The data, then, will be run by theoretical interest based on empirical evidence so it produces ‘science of society’ since the approach adapted on the same basis of natural science (May 2001, p.33).  In fact, the theory of social world is very dynamics and based on beliefs. Still May (2001, p.34) claimed that the problematic due to falsification must be taken for granted to empirical falsification. Since the social theory based on beliefs of people experiences, induction approach is commonly used in conducting qualitative social research in order to understand and express people perspectives which produce patterns into generalizations and give best explanation.  

When one holds qualitative social research, the objectivity in making generalisation and explanation often has high problematic. Objectivity is considered rather than subjectivity as the basic of natural science that says something ‘truth’ and this term is completely different from the reality in social research. Based on May (2001, p.9) social research contains of social world that is difficult to be generalised. Moreover, it tells about opinions and prejudices where the researcher makes claims about the work so that the research becomes reflection of opinions. Subjectivism often comes to describe on how people making claims, “meaning does not come out of an interplay between subject and object but is imposed on the object by the subject” (Crotty 1998, p.9). Thus, this debate then introduces different perspectives of philosophy such as positivism, interpretivism, realism, and idealism.

It needs to describe how the epistemology of positivism and interpretivism align the link between social theory and qualitative social research. Among the available definitions given, Bryant (1985 cited in May 2001, p.10) has a comprehensive description of this context where positivism refers to the thought of social and philosophical which often gives bad opinion without looking at its history.  Social science seems to be the same as natural science as natural phenomena to define the objectivity (May 2010, p10). The social researchers, therefore, must conduct the research as the same approaches as natural science researchers. By this approach, the qualitative social research should have finished with a set of something can be acknowledged as a truth, precise, or knowledge drawn by human behaviour to be hypothesis.  Positivist ordinarily has to control experiment group and pre or post test method (Lack 2010, p.6). It can be seen as limitation that is difficult to explain how to interpret variety ideas from different people, unless it only says about cause and effect, for instance, the reason and the reaction of people on a social phenomenon. Interpretivism, on the other hand, is established “by hermaneutics or the study meaning and interpretation in historical context” (Mack 2010, p.7) and “phenomology or considering human beings, subjective interpretations, perceptions as the starting point in understanding social phenomena (Ernest 1994 cited in Mack 2010, p.8). For this purpose, this approach let the qualitative social researchers to go deep into people experience so that observation must not seek objectively but subjectively. Similar to Harrington (2005, p.111) that interpretive social theory is “another way of expressing from the inside (understanding) and from outside (explaining)”. As a consequence, the research cannot be generalised to other conditions. However, for some qualitative social research such as action research will take the benefit from interpretivism approach since it reflect how teachers can handle class problem and address in appropriate ways.

Furthermore, there are realism and idealism which share to positivism and interpretivism. Realism contrasts with positivism in which it argues the people behaviour is not derived by knowledge of social world and not appear directly inside the knowledge but incomplete or partial (May 2001, p.12).  It is considered that in qualitative social research, it examines and explains deeply on social phenomena along with a framework, then ask people to act or prevent to what it is suggested. May (2001, p.14) also shared another different perspective, idealism, tends to focus on creation of ideas. That is in the qualitative social research which concerns in the process on understanding how people produce social life as a result of selection and interpretation the phenomena.

Finally social research might provide a critical theory to understand and give ideas about the necessity of social behaviours changes. Bentz and Shapiro (1998, p.146) define that critical social theory attempts to evaluate and criticise social phenomena that will be used in the process of social change by expert one who has already understood the situation. Consequently, qualitative social research should construct the knowledge and value reflects the authority in society. Still, the social research in critical theory “…is like other social institutions, such as the media and the legislatures must be the scene of the necessary struggles for power” (Gage 1989 cited in Mack 2001, p.9). The disadvantage, subsequently, tends to create new assumption of once people been in equity and equality, the society then can analyse and make change. In fact, Mack (2001, p.9) evaluated that there is little evidence to illustrate the product of emancipation, even, it gains the critical consciousness. Thus, in qualitative social research, critical theory in particularly would have a role to fulfil aspirations as the outcomes of the research so that hopefully the research can be improved better.

Overall, from the analysis mentioned above, discussing how social theory structures a qualitative social research is challenging. Although the position of social theory and qualitative social research is sometimes overlapping and profound, some studies and perspectives could be addressed how the research should be maintained.  As with qualitative research design, the choice of social theory depends on the problems of the research thereby research questions. Still, social theory controls to qualitative social research in terms of providing theory framework, designing study, and finally, collecting and analysing data. Social researchers, therefore, must be capable to relate the social theoretical to other different contexts.  Hence, that social theory has a clearly connection to qualitative social research.