social work research for dummies

Social Work Research Methods That Drive the Practice

A social worker surveys a community member.

Social workers advocate for the well-being of individuals, families and communities. But how do social workers know what interventions are needed to help an individual? How do they assess whether a treatment plan is working? What do social workers use to write evidence-based policy?

Social work involves research-informed practice and practice-informed research. At every level, social workers need to know objective facts about the populations they serve, the efficacy of their interventions and the likelihood that their policies will improve lives. A variety of social work research methods make that possible.

Data-Driven Work

Data is a collection of facts used for reference and analysis. In a field as broad as social work, data comes in many forms.

Quantitative vs. Qualitative

As with any research, social work research involves both quantitative and qualitative studies.

Quantitative Research

Answers to questions like these can help social workers know about the populations they serve — or hope to serve in the future.

How many students currently receive reduced-price school lunches in the local school district?
How many hours per week does a specific individual consume digital media?
How frequently did community members access a specific medical service last year?

Quantitative data — facts that can be measured and expressed numerically — are crucial for social work.

Quantitative research has advantages for social scientists. Such research can be more generalizable to large populations, as it uses specific sampling methods and lends itself to large datasets. It can provide important descriptive statistics about a specific population. Furthermore, by operationalizing variables, it can help social workers easily compare similar datasets with one another.

Qualitative Research

Qualitative data — facts that cannot be measured or expressed in terms of mere numbers or counts — offer rich insights into individuals, groups and societies. It can be collected via interviews and observations.

What attitudes do students have toward the reduced-price school lunch program?
What strategies do individuals use to moderate their weekly digital media consumption?
What factors made community members more or less likely to access a specific medical service last year?

Qualitative research can thereby provide a textured view of social contexts and systems that may not have been possible with quantitative methods. Plus, it may even suggest new lines of inquiry for social work research.

Mixed Methods Research

Combining quantitative and qualitative methods into a single study is known as mixed methods research. This form of research has gained popularity in the study of social sciences, according to a 2019 report in the academic journal Theory and Society. Since quantitative and qualitative methods answer different questions, merging them into a single study can balance the limitations of each and potentially produce more in-depth findings.

However, mixed methods research is not without its drawbacks. Combining research methods increases the complexity of a study and generally requires a higher level of expertise to collect, analyze and interpret the data. It also requires a greater level of effort, time and often money.

The Importance of Research Design

Data-driven practice plays an essential role in social work. Unlike philanthropists and altruistic volunteers, social workers are obligated to operate from a scientific knowledge base.

To know whether their programs are effective, social workers must conduct research to determine results, aggregate those results into comprehensible data, analyze and interpret their findings, and use evidence to justify next steps.

Employing the proper design ensures that any evidence obtained during research enables social workers to reliably answer their research questions.

Research Methods in Social Work

The various social work research methods have specific benefits and limitations determined by context. Common research methods include surveys, program evaluations, needs assessments, randomized controlled trials, descriptive studies and single-system designs.

Surveys involve a hypothesis and a series of questions in order to test that hypothesis. Social work researchers will send out a survey, receive responses, aggregate the results, analyze the data, and form conclusions based on trends.

Surveys are one of the most common research methods social workers use — and for good reason. They tend to be relatively simple and are usually affordable. However, surveys generally require large participant groups, and self-reports from survey respondents are not always reliable.

Program Evaluations

Social workers ally with all sorts of programs: after-school programs, government initiatives, nonprofit projects and private programs, for example.

Crucially, social workers must evaluate a program’s effectiveness in order to determine whether the program is meeting its goals and what improvements can be made to better serve the program’s target population.

Evidence-based programming helps everyone save money and time, and comparing programs with one another can help social workers make decisions about how to structure new initiatives. Evaluating programs becomes complicated, however, when programs have multiple goal metrics, some of which may be vague or difficult to assess (e.g., “we aim to promote the well-being of our community”).

Needs Assessments

Social workers use needs assessments to identify services and necessities that a population lacks access to.

Common social work populations that researchers may perform needs assessments on include:

People in a specific income group
Everyone in a specific geographic region
A specific ethnic group
People in a specific age group

In the field, a social worker may use a combination of methods (e.g., surveys and descriptive studies) to learn more about a specific population or program. Social workers look for gaps between the actual context and a population’s or individual’s “wants” or desires.

For example, a social worker could conduct a needs assessment with an individual with cancer trying to navigate the complex medical-industrial system. The social worker may ask the client questions about the number of hours they spend scheduling doctor’s appointments, commuting and managing their many medications. After learning more about the specific client needs, the social worker can identify opportunities for improvements in an updated care plan.

In policy and program development, social workers conduct needs assessments to determine where and how to effect change on a much larger scale. Integral to social work at all levels, needs assessments reveal crucial information about a population’s needs to researchers, policymakers and other stakeholders. Needs assessments may fall short, however, in revealing the root causes of those needs (e.g., structural racism).

Randomized Controlled Trials

Randomized controlled trials are studies in which a randomly selected group is subjected to a variable (e.g., a specific stimulus or treatment) and a control group is not. Social workers then measure and compare the results of the randomized group with the control group in order to glean insights about the effectiveness of a particular intervention or treatment.

Randomized controlled trials are easily reproducible and highly measurable. They’re useful when results are easily quantifiable. However, this method is less helpful when results are not easily quantifiable (i.e., when rich data such as narratives and on-the-ground observations are needed).

Descriptive Studies

Descriptive studies immerse the researcher in another context or culture to study specific participant practices or ways of living. Descriptive studies, including descriptive ethnographic studies, may overlap with and include other research methods:

Informant interviews
Census data
Observation

By using descriptive studies, researchers may glean a richer, deeper understanding of a nuanced culture or group on-site. The main limitations of this research method are that it tends to be time-consuming and expensive.

Single-System Designs

Unlike most medical studies, which involve testing a drug or treatment on two groups — an experimental group that receives the drug/treatment and a control group that does not — single-system designs allow researchers to study just one group (e.g., an individual or family).

Single-system designs typically entail studying a single group over a long period of time and may involve assessing the group’s response to multiple variables.

For example, consider a study on how media consumption affects a person’s mood. One way to test a hypothesis that consuming media correlates with low mood would be to observe two groups: a control group (no media) and an experimental group (two hours of media per day). When employing a single-system design, however, researchers would observe a single participant as they watch two hours of media per day for one week and then four hours per day of media the next week.

These designs allow researchers to test multiple variables over a longer period of time. However, similar to descriptive studies, single-system designs can be fairly time-consuming and costly.

Learn More About Social Work Research Methods

Social workers have the opportunity to improve the social environment by advocating for the vulnerable — including children, older adults and people with disabilities — and facilitating and developing resources and programs.

Learn more about how you can earn your Master of Social Work online at Virginia Commonwealth University . The highest-ranking school of social work in Virginia, VCU has a wide range of courses online. That means students can earn their degrees with the flexibility of learning at home. Learn more about how you can take your career in social work further with VCU.

From M.S.W. to LCSW: Understanding Your Career Path as a Social Worker

How Palliative Care Social Workers Support Patients With Terminal Illnesses

How to Become a Social Worker in Health Care

Gov.uk, Mixed Methods Study

MVS Open Press, Foundations of Social Work Research

Open Social Work Education, Scientific Inquiry in Social Work

Open Social Work, Graduate Research Methods in Social Work: A Project-Based Approach

Routledge, Research for Social Workers: An Introduction to Methods

SAGE Publications, Research Methods for Social Work: A Problem-Based Approach

Theory and Society, Mixed Methods Research: What It Is and What It Could Be

READY TO GET STARTED WITH OUR ONLINE M.S.W. PROGRAM FORMAT?

Want to learn more about the program and application process? Get in touch with the form below.

Bachelor’s degree is required to attend.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

1.1 How do social workers know what to do?

Learning objectives.

Reflect on how we know what to do as social workers
Differentiate between micro-, meso-, and macro-level analysis
Describe intuition, its purpose in social work, and its limitations
Identify specific types of cognitive biases and how the influence thought
Define scientific inquiry

What would you do?

Imagine you are a clinical social worker at a children’s mental health agency. Today, you receive a referral from your town’s middle school about a client who often skips school, gets into fights, and is disruptive in class. The school has suspended him and met with the parents multiple times, who say they practice strict discipline at home. Yet, the client’s behavior only gotten worse. When you arrive at the school to meet with the boy, you notice he has difficulty maintaining eye contact with you, appears distracted, and has a few bruises on his legs. At the same time, he is also a gifted artist, and you two spend the hour in which you assess him painting and drawing.

Given the strengths and challenges you notice, what interventions would you select for this client and how would you know your interventions worked?

Imagine you are a social worker in an urban food desert, a geographic area in which there is no grocery store that sells fresh food. Many of your low-income clients rely on food from the dollar store or convenience stores in order to live or simply order takeout. You are becoming concerned about your clients’ health, as many of them are obese and say they are unable to buy fresh food. Because convenience stores are more expensive and your clients mostly survive on minimum wage jobs or Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, they often have to rely on food pantries towards the end of the month once their money runs out. You have spent the past month building a coalition composed of members from your community, including non-profit agencies, religious groups, and healthcare workers to lobby your city council.

How should your group address the issue of food deserts in your community? What intervention do you suggest? How would you know if your intervention worked?

You are a social worker working at a public policy center focused on homelessness. Your city is seeking a large federal grant to address the growing problem of homelessness in your city and has hired you as a consultant to work on the grant proposal. After conducting a needs assessment in collaboration with local social service agencies and interviewing people who are homeless, you meet with city councilmembers to talk about your options to create a program. Local agencies want to spend the money to build additional capacity at existing shelters in the community. They also want to create a transitional housing program at an unused apartment complex where people can live after the shelter and learn independent living skills. On the other hand, the clients you interview want to receive housing vouchers so they can rent an apartment from a landlord in the community. They also fear the agencies running the shelter and transitional housing program would dictate how to live their lives and impose unnecessary rules, like restrictions on guests or quiet hours. When you ask the agencies about client feedback, they state that clients could not be trusted to manage in their own apartments and need the structure and supervision provided by agency support workers.

What kind of program should your city choose to implement? Which program is most likely to be effective?

Assuming you’ve taken a social work course before, you will notice that the case studies cover different levels of analysis in the social ecosystem—micro, meso, and macro. At the micro-level , social workers examine the smallest levels of interaction; even in some cases, just “the self” alone. That is our child in case 1. When social workers investigate groups and communities, such as our food desert in case 2, their inquiry is at the meso-level . At the macro-level , social workers examine social structures and institutions. Research at the macro-level examines large-scale patterns, including culture and government policy, as in case 3. These domains interact with each other, and it is common for a social work research project to address more than one level of analysis. Moreover, research that occurs on one level is likely to have implications at the other levels of analysis.

How do social workers know what to do?

Welcome to social work research. This chapter begins with three problems that social workers might face in practice and three questions about what a social worker should do next. If you haven’t already, spend a minute or two thinking about how you would respond to each case and jot down some notes. How would you respond to each of these cases?

For many of you this textbook will likely come at an early point in your social work education, so it may seem unfair to ask you what the right answers are. And to disappoint you further, this course will not teach you the right answer to these questions. It will, however, teach you how to answer these questions for yourself. Social workers must learn how to examine the literature on a topic, come to a reasoned conclusion, and use that knowledge in their practice. Similarly, social workers engage in research to make sure their interventions are helping, not harming, clients and to contribute to social science as well as social justice.

Again, assuming you did not have advanced knowledge of the topics in the case studies, when you thought about what you might do in those practice situations, you were likely using intuition (Cheung, 2016). Intuition is a way of knowing that is mostly unconscious. You simply have a gut feeling about what you should do. As you think about a problem such as those in the case studies, you notice certain details and ignore others. Using your past experiences, you apply knowledge that seems to be relevant and make predictions about what might be true.

In this way, intuition is based on direct experience . Many of us know things simply because we’ve experienced them directly. For example, you would know that electric fences can be pretty dangerous and painful if you touched one while standing in a puddle of water. We all probably have times we can recall when we learned something because we experienced it. If you grew up in Minnesota, you would observe plenty of kids learning each winter that it really is true that your tongue will stick to metal if it’s very cold outside. Similarly, if you passed a police officer on a two-lane highway while driving 20 miles over the speed limit, you would probably learn that that’s a good way to earn a traffic ticket.

Intuition and direct experience are powerful forces. Uniquely, social work is a discipline that values intuition, though it will take quite a while for you to develop what social workers refer to as practice wisdom . Practice wisdom is the “learning by doing” that develops as one practices social work over a period of time. Social workers also reflect on their practice, independently and with colleagues, which sharpens their intuitions and opens their mind to other viewpoints. While your direct experience in social work may be limited at this point, feel confident that through reflective practice you will attain practice wisdom.

However, it’s important to note that intuitions are not always correct. Think back to the first case study. What might be your novice diagnosis for this child’s behavior? Does he have attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) because he is distractible and getting into trouble at school? Or are those symptoms of autism spectrum disorder or an attachment disorder? Are the bruises on his legs an indicator of ADHD, or do they indicate possible physical abuse at home? Even if you arrived at an accurate assessment of the situation, you would still need to figure out what kind of intervention to use with the client. If he has a mental health issue, you might say, “give him therapy.” Well…what kind of therapy? Should we use cognitive-behavioral therapy, play therapy, art therapy, family therapy, or animal assisted therapy? Should we try a combination of therapy and medication prescribed by a psychiatrist?

We could guess which intervention would be best…but in practice, that would be highly unethical. If we guessed wrong, we could be wasting time, or worse, actively harming a client. We need to ground our social work interventions with clients and systems with something more secure than our intuition and experience.

Cognitive biases

Although the human mind is a marvel of observation and data analysis, there are universal flaws in thinking that must be overcome. We all rely on mental shortcuts to help us make sense of a continuous stream of new information. All people, including me and you, must train our minds to be aware of predictable flaws in thinking, termed cognitive biases . Here is a link to the Wikipedia entry on cognitive biases . As you can see, it is quite long. We will review some of the most important ones here, but take a minute and browse around to get a sense of how baked-in cognitive biases are to how humans think.

The most important cognitive bias for social scientists to be aware of is confirmation bias . Confirmation bias involves observing and analyzing information in a way that confirms what you already think is true. No person is a blank slate. We all arrive at each moment with a set of beliefs, experiences, and models of how the world works that we develop over time. Often, these are grounded in our own personal experiences. Confirmation bias assumes these intuitions are correct and ignores or manipulates new information order to avoid challenging what we already believe to be true.

Confirmation bias can be seen in many ways. Sometimes, people will only pay attention to the information that fits their preconceived ideas and ignore information that does not fit. This is called selective observation . Other times, people will make hasty conclusions about a broad pattern based on only a few observations. This is called overgeneralization . Let’s walk through an example and see how they each would function.

In our second case study, we are trying to figure out how to help people who receive SNAP (formerly Food Stamps) who live in a food desert. Let’s say that we have arrived at a solution and are now lobbying the city council to implement it. There are many people who have negative beliefs about people who are “on welfare.” These people believe individuals who receive social welfare benefits spend their money irresponsibly, are too lazy to get a job, and manipulate the system to maintain or increase their government payout. People expressing this belief may provide an example like Louis Cuff , who bought steak and lobster with his SNAP benefits and resold them for a profit.

City council members who hold these beliefs may ignore the truth about your client population—that people experiencing poverty usually spend their money responsibly and genuinely need help accessing fresh and healthy food. This would be an example of selective observation, only looking at the cases that confirm their biased beliefs about people in poverty and ignoring evidence that challenges that perspective. Likely, these are grounded in overgeneralization, in which one example, like Mr. Cuff, is applied broadly to the population of people using social welfare programs. Social workers in this situation would have to hope that city council members are open to another perspective and can be swayed by evidence that challenges their beliefs. Otherwise, they will continue to rely on a biased view of people in poverty when they create policies.

But where do these beliefs and biases come from? Perhaps, someone who the person considers an authority told them that people in poverty are lazy and manipulative. Naively relying on authority can take many forms. We might rely on our parents, friends, or religious leaders as authorities on a topic. We might consult someone who identifies as an expert in the field and simply follow what they say. We might hop aboard a “bandwagon” and adopt the fashionable ideas and theories of our peers and friends.

Now, it is important to note that experts in the field should generally be trusted to provide well-informed answers on a topic, though that knowledge should be receptive to skeptical critique and will develop over time as more scholars study the topic. There are limits to skepticism, however. Disagreeing with experts about global warming, the shape of the earth, or the efficacy and safety of vaccines does not make one free of cognitive biases. On the contrary, it is likely that the person is falling victim to the Dunning -Kruger effect , in which unskilled people overestimate their ability to find the truth. As this comic illustrates, they are at the top of Mount Stupid. Only through rigorous, scientific inquiry can they progress down the back slope and hope to increase their depth of knowledge about a topic.

Scientific Inquiry

Cognitive biases are most often expressed when people are using informal observation. Until you read the question at the beginning of this chapter, you may have had little reason to formally observe and make sense of information about children’s mental health, food deserts, or homelessness policy. Because you engaged in informal observation, it is more likely that you will express cognitive biases in your responses. The problem with informal observation is that sometimes it is right, and sometimes it is wrong. And without any systematic process for observing or assessing the accuracy of our observations, we can never really be sure that our informal observations are accurate. In order to minimize the effect of cognitive biases and come up with the truest understanding of a topic, we must apply a systematic framework for understanding what we observe.

The opposite of informal observation is scientific inquiry, used interchangeably with the term research methods in this text. These terms refer to an organized, logical way of knowing that involves both theory and observation. Science accounts for the limitations of cognitive biases—not perfectly, though—by ensuring observations are done rigorously, following a prescribed set of steps. Scientists clearly describe the methods they use to conduct observations and create theories about the social world. Theories are tested by observing the social world, and they can be shown to be false or incomplete. In short, scientists try to learn the truth. Social workers use scientific truths in their practice and conduct research to revise and extend our understanding of what is true in the social world. Social workers who ignore science and act based on biased or informal observation may actively harm clients.

Key Takeaways

Social work research occurs on the micro-, meso-, and macro-level.
Intuition is a power, though woefully incomplete, guide to action in social work.
All human thought is subject to cognitive biases.
Scientific inquiry accounts for cognitive biases by applying an organized, logical way of observing and theorizing about the world.
Authority- learning by listening to what people in authority say is true
Cognitive biases- predictable flaws in thinking
Confirmation bias- observing and analyzing information in a way that confirms what you already think is true
Direct experience- learning through informal observation
Dunning-Kruger effect- when unskilled people overestimate their ability and knowledge (and experts underestimate their ability and knowledge)
Intuition- your “gut feeling” about what to do
Macro-level- examining social structures and institutions
Meso-level- examining interaction between groups
Micro-level- examining the smallest levels of interaction, usually individuals
Overgeneralization- using limited observations to make assumptions about broad patterns
Practice wisdom- “learning by doing” that guides social work intervention and increases over time
Research methods- an organized, logical way of knowing based on theory and observation

Image Attributions

Thinking woman by Free-Photos via Pixabay CC-0

Light bulb by MasterTux via Pixabay CC-0

Foundations of Social Work Research Copyright © 2020 by Rebecca L. Mauldin is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

No internet connection.

All search filters on the page have been cleared., your search has been saved..

All content
Dictionaries
Encyclopedias
Expert Insights
Foundations
How-to Guides
Journal Articles
Little Blue Books
Little Green Books
Project Planner
Tools Directory
Sign in to my profile My Profile

Sign in Signed in
My profile My Profile

The Handbook of Social Work Research Methods

Edited by: Bruce A. Thyer
Publisher: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Publication year: 2001
Online pub date: January 01, 2011
Discipline: Social Work
Methods: Measurement , Case study research , Theory
DOI: https:// doi. org/10.4135/9781412986182
Keywords: clients , handbooks , knowledge , population , social problems , social welfare , social work practice Show all Show less
Print ISBN: 9780761919063
Online ISBN: 9781412986182
Buy the book icon link

Subject index

"`Not so much a handbook, but an excellent source of reference' - British Journal of Social Work This volume is the definitive resource for anyone doing research in social work. It details both quantitative and qualitative methods and data collection, as well as suggesting the methods appropriate to particular types of studies. It also covers issues such as ethics, gender and ethnicity, and offers advice on how to write up and present your research."

Front Matter

Acknowledgments
Overview of Quantitative Research Methods
Probability and Sampling
Reliability and Validity in Quantitative Measurement
Locating Instruments
Statistics for Social Workers
Types of Studies
Descriptive Studies
Needs Assessments
Randomized Controlled Trials
Program Evaluation
Using Cost → Procedure → Process → Outcome Analysis
Single-System Designs
Overview of Qualitative Research Methods
Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research
Narrative Case Studies
In-Depth Interviews
Ethnographic Research Methods
Participant Observation
Grounded Theory and Other Inductive Research Methods
Theory Development
Historical Research
Literature Reviews
Critical Analyses
Ethical Issues
Gender, Ethnicity, and Race Matters
Comparative International Research
Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods
Applying for Research Grants
Disseminating Research Findings

Back Matter

About the Editor
About the Contributors

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day free trial, more like this, sage recommends.

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Have you created a personal profile? Login or create a profile so that you can save clips, playlists and searches

Navigating away from this page will delete your results

Please save your results to "My Self-Assessments" in your profile before navigating away from this page.

You must have a valid academic email address to sign up.

Get off-campus access

View or download all content my institution has access to.

view my profile
view my lists

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

4 1.4 Understanding research

Learning objectives.

Describe common barriers to engaging with social work research
Identify alternative ways to thinking about research methods

Sometimes students struggle to see the connection between research and social work practice. Most students enjoy a social work theory class because they can better understand the world around them. Students also like practice because it shows them how to conduct clinical work with clients—i.e., what most social work students want to do. It can be helpful to look critically at the potential barriers to embracing the study of social work. Most student barriers to research come from the following beliefs:

Research is useless!

Students who say that research methods is not a useful class to them are saying something important. As a scholar (or student), your most valuable asset is your time. You give your time to the subjects you consider important to you and your future practice. Because most social workers don’t become researchers or practitioner-researchers, students feel like a research methods class is a waste of time.

Our discussion of evidence-based practice and the ways in which social workers use research methods in practice brought home the idea that social workers play an important role in creating new knowledge about social services. On a more immediate level, research methods will also help you become a stronger social work student. Upcoming chapters of this textbook will review how to search for literature on a topic and write a literature review. These skills are relevant in every classroom during your academic career. The rest of the textbook will help you understand the mechanics of research methods so you can better understand the content of those pesky journal articles your professors force you to cite in your papers.

Research is too hard!

Research methods involves a lot of terminology that is entirely new to social workers. Other domains of social work, such as practice, are easier to apply your intuition towards. You understand how to be an empathetic person, and your experiences in life can help guide you through a practice situation or even theoretical or conceptual question. Research may seem like a totally new area in which you have no previous experience. It can seem like a lot to learn. In addition to the normal memorization and application of terms, research methods also has wrong answers. There are certain combinations of methods that just don’t work together.

The fear is entirely understandable. Research is not straightforward. As Figure 1.1 shows, it is a process that is non-linear, involving multiple revisions, wrong turns, and dead ends before you figure out the best question and research approach. You may have to go back to chapters after having read them or even peek ahead at chapters your class hasn’t covered yet.

research is more of a squiggle than a straight line

Moreover, research is something you learn by doing…and stumbling a few times. It’s an iterative process, or one that requires lots of tries to get right. There isn’t a shortcut for learning research, but hopefully your research methods class is one in which your research project is broken down into smaller parts and you get consistent feedback throughout the process. No one just knows research. It’s something you pick up by doing it, reflecting on the experiences and results, redoing your work, and revising it in consultation with your professor.

Research is boring!

Research methods is sometimes seen as a boring topic by many students. Practice knowledge and even theory are fun to learn because they are easy to apply and give you insight into the world around you. Research just seems like its own weird, remote thing.

Your social work education will present some generalist material, which is applicable to nearly all social work practice situations, and some applied material, which is applicable to specific social work practice situations. However, no education will provide you with everything you need to know. And certainly, no education will tell you what will be discovered over the next few decades of your practice. Our exploration of research methods will help you further understand how the theories, practice models, and techniques you learn in your other classes are created and tested scientifically. The material you learn in research class will allow you to think critically about material throughout your entire program and into your social work career.

Get out of your own way

Together, the beliefs of “research is useless, boring, and hard” can create a self-fulfilling prophecy for students. If you believe research is boring, you won’t find it interesting. If you believe research is hard, you will struggle more with assignments. If you believe research is useless, you won’t see its utility. Let’s provide some reframing of how you might think about research using these touchstones:

All social workers rely on social science research to engage in competent practice.
No one already knows research. It’s something I’ll learn through practice. And it’s challenging for everyone.
Research is relevant to me because it allows me to figure out what is known about any topic I want to study.
If the topic I choose to study is important to me, I will be more interested in research.

Structure of this textbook

While you may not have chosen this course, by reframing your approach to it, you increase the likelihood of getting a lot out of it. To that end, here is the structure of this book:

In Chapters 2-5, you’ll learn about how research informs and tests theory. We’ll discuss how to conduct research in an ethical manner, create research questions, and measure concepts in the social world.

Chapters 6-10 will describe how to conduct research, whether it’s a quantitative survey or experiment, or alternately, a qualitative interview or focus group. We’ll also review how to analyze data that someone else has already collected.

Finally, Chapters 11 and 12 will review the types of research most commonly used in social work practice, including evaluation research and action research, and how to report the results of your research to various audiences.

Key Takeaways

Anxiety about research methods is a common experience for students.
Research methods will help you become a better scholar and practitioner.

Image Attributions

Untitled image by Ohio State University Libraries CC-BY 4.0

Share This Book

Scientific Inquiry in Social Work

(9 reviews)

Matthew DeCarlo, Radford University

ISBN 13: 9781975033729

Publisher: Open Social Work Education

Language: English

Formats Available

Conditions of use.

Learn more about reviews.

Reviewed by Shannon Blajeski, Assistant Professor, Portland State University on 3/10/23

Comprehensiveness rating: 5 see less

This book provides an introduction to research and inquiry in social work with an applied focus geared for the MSW student. The text covers 16 chapters, including several dedicated to understanding how to begin the research process, a chapter on ethics, and then eight chapters dedicated to research methods. The subchapters (1-5 per chapter) are concise and focused while also being tied to current knowledge and events so as to hold the reader's attention. It is comprehensive, but some of the later chapters covering research methods as well as the final chapter seem a bit scant and could be expanded. The glossary at the end of each chapter is helpful as is the index that is always accessible from the left-hand drop-down menu.

Content Accuracy rating: 4

The author pulls in relevant current and recent public events to illustrate important points about social research throughout the book. Each sub-chapter reads as accurate. I did not come across any inaccuracies in the text, however I would recommend a change in the title of Chapter 15 as "real world research" certainly encompasses more than program evaluation, single-subject designs, and action research.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 5

Another major strength of this book is that it adds currency to engage the reader while also maintaining its relevance to research methods. None of the current events/recent events that are described seem dated nor will they fade from relevance in a number of years. In addition, the concise nature of the modules should make them easy to update when needed to maintain relevancy in future editions.

Clarity rating: 5

Clarity is a major strength of this textbook. As described in the interface section, this book is written to be clear and concise, without unnecessary extra text that detracts from the concise content provided in each chapter. Any lengthy excerpts are also very engaging which lends itself to a clear presentation of content for the reader.

Consistency rating: 5

The text and content seems to be presented consistently throughout the book. Terminology and frameworks are balanced with real-world examples and current events.

Modularity rating: 5

The chapters of this textbook are appropriately spaced and easily digestible, particularly for readers with time constraints. Each chapter contains 3-5 sub-chapters that build upon each other in a scaffolding style. This makes it simple for the instructor to assign each chapter (sometimes two) per weekly session as well as add in additional assigned readings to complement the text.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 5

The overall organization of the chapters flow well. The book begins with a typical introduction to research aimed at social work practitioners or new students in social work. It then moves into a set of chapters on beginning a research project, reviewing literature, and asking research questions, followed by a chapter on ethics. Next, the text transitions to three chapters covering constructs, measurement, and sampling, followed by five chapters covering research methods, and a closing chapter on dissemination of research. This is one of the more logically-organized research methods texts that I have used as an instructor.

Interface rating: 5

The modular chapters are easy to navigate and the interface of each chapter follows a standard presentation style with the reading followed by a short vocabulary glossary and references. This presentation lends itself to a familiarity for students that helps them become more efficient with completing reading assignments, even in short bursts of time. This is particularly important for online and returning learners who may juggle their assignment time with family and work obligations.

Grammatical Errors rating: 5

No grammatical errors were noted.

Cultural Relevance rating: 4

At first glance at the table of contents, the book doesn't seem to be overtly committed to cultural representation, however, upon reading the chapters, it becomes clear that the author does try to represent and reference marginalized groups (e.g., women, individuals with disabilities, racial/ethnic/gender intersectionality) within the examples used. I also am very appreciative that the bottom of each introduction page for each chapter contains content trigger warnings for any possible topics that could be upsetting, e.g., substance abuse, violence.

As the author likely knows, social work students are eager to engage in learning that is current and relevant to their social causes. This book is written in a way that engages a non-researcher social worker into reading about research by weaving research information into topics that they might find compelling. It also does this in a concise way where short bits of pertinent information are presented, making the text accessible without needing to sustain long periods of attention. This is particularly important for online and returning learners who may need to sit with their readings in short bursts due to attending school while juggling work and family obligations.

Reviewed by Lynn Goerdt, Associate Professor, University of Wisconsin - Superior on 9/17/21

Text appears to be comprehensive in covering steps for typical SWK research class, taking students from the introduction of the purpose and importance of research to how to design and analyze research. Author covers the multitude of ways that social workers engage in research as way of building knowledge and ways that social work practitioners conduct research to evaluate their practice, including outcome evaluation, single subject design, and action research. I particularly appreciated the last section on reporting research, which should be very practical.

Overall, content appears mostly accurate which few errors. Definitions and citations are mostly thorough and clear. Author does cite Wikipedia in at least one occasion which could be credible, depending on the source of the Wikipedia content. There were a few references within the text to comic or stories but the referenced material was not always apparent.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 4

The content of Scientific Inquiry for Social Work is relevant, as the field of social work research methods does not appear to change quickly, although there are innovations. The author referenced examples which appear to be recent and likely relatable to interests of current students. Primary area of innovation is in using technology for the collection and analysis of data, which could be expanded, particularly using social media for soliciting research participants.

Style is personable and content appears to be accessible, which is a unique attribute for a research textbook. Author uses first person in many instances, particularly in the beginning to present the content as relatable.

Format appears to be consistent in format and relative length. Each chapter includes learning objectives, content advisory (if applicable), key takeaways and glossary. Author uses color and text boxes to draw attention to these sections.

Modularity rating: 4

Text is divided into modules which could easily be assigned and reviewed in a class. The text modules could also be re-structured if desired to fit curricular uniqueness’s. Author uses images to illuminate the concepts of the module or chapter, but they often take about 1/3 of the page, which extends the size of the textbook quite a bit. Unclear if benefit of images outweighs additional cost if PDF version is printed.

Textbook is organized in a very logical and clear fashion. Each section appears to be approximately 6-10 pages in length which seems to be an optimal length for student attention and comprehension.

Interface rating: 4

There were some distortions of the text (size and visibility) but they were a fairly minor distraction and did not appear to reduce access to the content. Otherwise text was easy to navigate.

Grammatical Errors rating: 4

No grammatical errors were noted but hyperlinks to outside content were referenced but not always visible which occasionally resulted in an awkward read. Specific link may be in resources section of each chapter but occasionally they were also included in the text.

I did not recognize any text which was culturally insensitive or offensive. Images used which depicted people, appeared to represent diverse experiences, cultures, settings and persons. Did notice image depicting homelessness appeared to be stereotypical person sleeping on sidewalk, which can perpetuate a common perception of homelessness. Would encourage author to consider images representing a wider range of experiences of a social phenomena. Content advisories are used for each section, which is not necessarily cultural relevance but is respectful and recognizes the diversity of experiences and triggers that the readers may have.

Overall, I was very impressed and encouraged with the well organized content and thoughtful flow of this important textbook for social work students and instructors. The length and readability of each chapter would likely be appreciated by instructors as well as students, increasing the extent that the learning outcomes would be achieved. Teaching research is very challenging because the content and application can feel very intimidating. The author also has provided access to supplemental resources such as presentations and assignments.

Reviewed by elaine gatewood, Adjunct Faculty, Bridgewater State University on 6/15/21

The book provides concrete and clear information on using research as consumers, It provides a comprehensive review of each step to take to develop a research project from beginning to completion, with examples. read more

Content Accuracy rating: 5

From my perspective, content is highly accurate in the field of learning research method and unbiased. It's all there!

The content is highly relevant and up-to-date in the field. The book is written and arranged in a way that its easy to follow along with adding updates.

The book is written in clear and concise. The book provides appropriate context for any jargon/technical terminology used along with examples which readers are able to follow along and understand.

The contents of the book flow quite well. The framework in the book is consistent.

The text appears easily adaptable for readers and the author also provides accompanying PowerPoint presentations; these are a good foundation tools for readers to use and implement.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 4

The contents of the book flow very well. Readers would be able to put into practice the key reading strategies shared in the book ) because its organization is laid out nicely

Interface rating: 3

The interface is generally good, but I was only able to download the .pdf. This may present issues for some student readers.

There are no grammatical errors.

The text was culturally relevant and provided diverse research and practice examples. The text could have benefited from sexamples of intersectional and anti-oppressive lenses for students to consider in their practice.

This text is a comprehensive introduction to research that can be easily adapted for a BSW/MSW research course.

Reviewed by Taylor Hall, Assistant Professor, Bridgewater State University on 6/30/20

This text is more comprehensive than the text I currently use in my Research Methods in Social Work course, which students have to pay for. This text not only covers both qualitative and quantitative research methods, but also all parts of the research process from thinking about research ideas to questions all the way to evaluation after social work programs/policies have been employed.

Not much to say here- with research methods, things are black and white; it is or isn't. This content is accurate. I also like to way the content is explained in light of social work values and ethics. This is something our students can struggle with, and this is helpful in terms of showing why social work needs to pay attention to research.

There are upcoming changes to CSWE's competencies, therefore lots of text materials are going to need to be updated soon. Otherwise, case examples are pertinent and timely.

Clarity rating: 4

I think that research methods for social workers is a difficult field of study. Many go into the field to be clinicians, and few understand (off the bat) the importance of understanding methods of research. I think this textbook makes it clear to me, but hard to rate a 5 as I know from a student's perspective, lots of the terminology is so new.

Appears to be so- I was able to follow, seems consistent.

Yes- and I think this is a strong point of this text. This was easy to follow and read, and I could see myself easily divvying up different sections for students to work on in groups.

Yes- makes sense to me and the way I teach this course. I like the 30,000 ft view then honing in on specific types of research, all along the way explaining the different pieces of the research process and in writing a research paper.

I sometimes struggle with online platforms versus in person texts to read, and this OER is visually appealing- there is not too much text on the pages, it is spaced in a way that makes it easier to read. Colors are used well to highlight pertinent information.

Not something I found in this text.

Cultural Relevance rating: 3

This is a place where I feel the text could use some work. A nod to past wrongdoings in research methods on oppressed groups, and more of a discussion on social work's role in social justice with an eye towards righting the wrongs of the past. Updated language re: person first language, more diverse examples, etc.

This is a very useful text, and I am going to recommend my department check it out for future use, especially as many of our students are first gen and working class and would love to save money on textbooks where possible.

Reviewed by Olubunmi Oyewuwo-Gassikia, Assistant Professor, Northeastern Illinois University on 5/5/20

This text is an appropriate and comprehensive introduction to research methods for BSW students. It guides the reader through each stage of the research project, including identifying a research question, conducting and writing a literature review, research ethics, theory, research design, methodology, sampling, and dissemination. The author explains complex concepts - such as paradigms, epistemology, and ontology - in clear, simple terms and through the use of practical, social work examples for the reader. I especially appreciated the balanced attention to quantitative and qualitative methods, including the explanation of data collection and basic analysis techniques for both. The text could benefit from the inclusion of an explanation of research design notations.

The text is accurate and unbiased. Additionally, the author effectively incorporates referenced sources, including sources one can use for further learning.

The content is relevant and timely. The author incorporates real, recent research examples that reflects the applicability of research at each level of social practice (micro, meso, and macro) throughout the text. The text will benefit from regular updates in research examples.

The text is written in a clear, approachable manner. The chapters are a reasonable length without sacrificing appropriate depth into the subject manner.

The text is consistent throughout. The author is effective in reintroducing previously explained terms from previous chapters.

The text appears easily adaptable. The instructions provided by the author on how to adapt the text for one's course are helpful to one who would like to use the text but not in its entirety. The author also provides accompanying PowerPoint presentations; these are a good foundation but will likely require tailoring based on the teaching style of the instructor.

Generally, the text flows well. However, chapter 5 (Ethics) should come earlier, preferably before chapter 3 (Reviewing & Evaluating the Literature). It is important that students understand research ethics as ethical concerns are an important aspect of evaluating the quality of research studies. Chapter 15 (Real-World Research) should also come earlier in the text, most suitably before or after chapter 7 (Design and Causality).

The interface is generally good, but I was only able to download the .pdf. The setup of the .pdf is difficult to navigate, especially if one wants to jump from chapter to chapter. This may present issues for the student reader.

The text was culturally relevant and provided diverse research and practice examples. The text could have benefited from more critical research examples, such as examples of research studies that incorporate intersectional and anti-oppressive lenses.

This text is a comprehensive introduction to research that can be easily adapted for a BSW level research course.

Reviewed by Smita Dewan, Assistant Professor, New York City College of Technology, Department of Human Services on 12/6/19

Comprehensiveness rating: 4 see less

This is a very good introductory research methodology textbook for undergraduate students of social work or human services. For students who might be intimidated by social research, the text provides assurance that by learning basic concepts of research methodology, students will be better scholars and social work or human service practitioners. The content and flow of the text book supports a basic assignment of most research methodology courses which is to develop a research proposal or a research project. Each stage of research is explained well with many examples from social work practice that has the potential to keep the student engaged.

The glossary at the end of each chapter is very comprehensive but does not include the page number/s where the content is located. The glossary at the end of the book also lacks page numbers which might make it cumbersome for students seeking a quick reference.

The content is accurate and unbiased. Suggested exercises and prompts for students to engage in critical thinking and to identify biases in research that informs practice may help students understand the complexities of social research.

Content is up-to-date and concepts of research methodology presented is unlikely to be obsolete in the coming years. However, recent trends in research such as data mining, using algorithms for social policy and practice implications, privacy concerns, role of social media are topics that could be considered for inclusion in the forthcoming editions.

Content is presented very clearly for undergraduate students. Key takeaways and glossary for each section of the chapter is very useful for students.

Presentation of content, format and organization is consistent throughout the book.

Subsections within each chapter is very helpful for the students who might be assigned readings just in parts for the class.

Students would benefit from reading about research ethics right after the introductory chapter. I would also move Chapter 8 to right after the literature review which might inform creating and refining the research question. Content on evaluation research could also be moved up to follow the chapter on experimental designs. Regardless of the organization, the course instructors can assign chapters according to the course requirements.

PDF version of the book is very easy to use especially as students can save a copy on their computers and do not have to be online. Charts and tables are well presented but some of the images/photographs do not necessarily serve to enhance learning. Image attributions could be provided at the end of the chapter instead of being listed under the glossary. Students might also find it useful to be able to highlight the content and make annotations. This requires that students sign-in. Students should be able to highlight and annotate a downloaded version through Adobe Reader.

I did not find any grammatical errors.

Cultural Relevance rating: 5

Content is not insensitive or offensive in any way. Supporting examples in chapters are very diverse. Students would benefit from some examples of international research (both positive and negative examples) of protection of human subjects.

Reviewed by Jill Hoffman, Assistant Professor, Portland State University on 10/29/19

This text includes 16 chapters that cover content related to the process of conducting research. From identifying a topic and reviewing the literature, to formulating a question, designing a study, and disseminating findings, the text includes research basics that most other introductory social work research texts include. Content on ethics, theory, and to a lesser extent evaluation, single-subject design, and action research are also included. There is a glossary at the end of the text that includes information on the location of the terms. There is a practice behaviors index, but not an index in the traditional sense. If using the text electronically, search functions make it easy to find necessary information despite not having an index. If using a printed version, this would be more difficult. The text includes examples to illustrate concepts that are relevant to settings in which social workers might work. As most other introductory social work research texts, this book appears to come from a mainly positivist view. I would have appreciated more of a discussion related to power, privilege, and oppression and the role these play in the research topics that get studied and who benefits, along with anti-oppressive research. Related to evaluations, a quick mention of logic models would be helpful.

The information appears to be accurate and error free. The language in the text seems to emphasize "right/wrong" choices/decisions instead of highlighting the complexities of research and practice. Using gender-neutral pronouns would also make the language more inclusive.

Content appears to be up-to-date and relevant. Any updating would be straightforward to carry out. I found at least one link that did not work (e.g., NREPP) so if you use this text it will be important to check and make sure things are updated.

The content is clearly written, using examples to illustrate various concepts. I appreciated prompts for questions throughout each chapter in order to engage students in the content. Key terms are bolded, which helps to easily identify important points.

Information is presented in a consistent manner throughout the text.

Each chapter is divided into subsections that help with readability. It is easy to pick and choose various pieces of the text for your course if you're not using the entire thing.

There are many ways you can organize a social work research text. Personally, I prefer to talk about ethics and theory early on, so that students have this as a framework as they read about other's studies and design their own. In the case of this text, I'd put those two chapters right after chapter 1. As others have suggested, I'd also move up the content on research questions, perhaps after chapter 4.

In the online version, no significant interface issues arose. The only thing that would be helpful is to have chapter titles clearly presented when navigating through the text in the online version. For example, when you click through to a new chapter, the title simply says "6.0 Chapter introduction." In order to see the chapter title you have to click into the contents tab. Not a huge issue but could help with navigating the online version. In the pdf version, the links in the table of contents allowed me to navigate through to various sections. I did notice that some of the external links were not complete (e.g., on page 290, the URL is linked as "http://baby-").

Cultural representation in the text is similar to many other introductory social work research texts. There's more of an emphasis on white, western, cis-gendered individuals, particularly in the images. In examples, it appeared that only male/female pronouns were used.

Reviewed by Monica Roth Day, Associate Professor, Social Work, Metropolitan State University (Saint Paul, Minnesota) on 12/26/18

The book provides concrete and clear information on using research as consumers, then developing research as producers of knowledge. It provides a comprehensive review of each step to take to develop a research project from beginning to completion, with appropriate examples. More specific social work links would be helpful as students learn more about the field and the uses of research.

The book is accurate and communicates information and largely without bias. Numerous examples are provided from varied sources, which are then used to discuss potential for bias in research. The addition of critical race theory concepts would add to this discussion, to ground students in the importance of understanding implicit bias as researchers and ways to develop their own awareness.

The book is highly relevant. It provides historical and current examples of research which communicate concepts using accessible language that is current to social work. The text is written so that updates should be easy. Links need to be updated on a regular basis.

The book is accessible for students at it uses common language to communicate concepts while helping students build their research vocabulary. Terminology is communicate both within the text and in glossaries, and technical terms are minimally used.

The book is consistent in its use of terminology and framework. It follows a pattern of development, from consuming research to producing research. The steps are predictable and walk students through appropriate actions to take.

The book is easily readable. Each chapter is divided in sections that are easy to navigate and understand. Pictures and tables are used to support text.

Chapters are in logical order and follow a common pattern.

When reading the book online, the text was largely free of interface issues. As a PDF, there were issues with formatting. Be aware that students who may wish to download the book into a Kindle or other book reader may experience issues.

The text was grammatically correct with no misspellings.

While the book is culturally relevant, it lacks the application of critical race theory. While students will learn about bias in research, critical race theory would ground students in the importance of understanding implicit bias as researchers and ways to develop their own awareness. It would also help students understand why the background of researchers is important in relation to the ways of knowing.

Reviewed by Jennifer Wareham, Associate Professor, Wayne State University on 11/30/18

The book provides a comprehensive introduction to research methods from the perspective of the discipline of Social Work. The book borrows heavily from Amy Blackstone’s Principles of Sociological Inquiry – Qualitative and Quantitative Methods open textbook. The book is divided into 16 chapters, covering: differences in reasoning and scientific thought, starting a research project, writing a literature review, ethics in social science research, how theory relates to research, research design, causality, measurement, sampling, survey research, experimental design, qualitative interviews and focus groups, evaluation research, and reporting research. Some of the more advanced concepts and topics are only covered at superficial level, which limits the intended population of readers to high school students, undergraduate students, or those with no background in research methods. Since the book is geared toward Social Work undergraduate students, the chapters and content address methodologies commonly used in this field, but ignore methodologies that may be more popular in other social science fields. For example, the material on qualitative methods is narrow and focuses on commonly used qualitative methods in Social Work. In addition, the chapter on evaluation is limited to a general overview of evaluation research, which could be improved with more in-depth discussion of different types of evaluation (e.g., needs assessment, evaluability assessment, process evaluation, impact/outcomes evaluation) and real-world examples of different types of evaluation implemented in Social Work. Overall, the author provides examples that are easy for practitioners in Social Work to understand, which are also easily relatable for students in similar disciplines such as criminal justice. The book provides a glossary of key terms. There is no index; however, users can search for terms using the find (Ctrl-F) function in the PDF version of the book.

Overall, the content inside this book is accurate, error-free, and unbiased. However, the content is limited to the Social Work perspective, which may be considered somewhat biased or inaccurate from the perspective of others in different disciplines.

The book describes classic examples used in most texts on social science research methods. It also includes contemporary and relevant examples. Some of the content (such as web addresses and contemporary news pieces) will need to be updated every few years. The text is written and arranged in such a way that any necessary updates should be relatively easy and straightforward to implement.

The book is written in clear and accessible prose. The book provides appropriate context for any jargon/technical terminology used. Readers from any social science discipline should be able to understand the content and context of the material presented in the book.

The framework and use of terminology in the book are consistent.

This book is highly modular. The author has even improved upon the modularity of the book from Blackstone’s open text (which serves as the basis of the present text). Each chapter is divided into short, related subsections. The design of the chapters and their subsections make it easy to divide the material into units of study across a semester or quarter of instruction.

Generally, the book is organized in a similar manner as other texts on social science research methods. However, the organization could be improved slightly. Chapters 2 through 4 describe the process of beginning a research project and conducting a literature review. Chapter 8 describes refining a research question. This chapter could be moved to follow the Chapter 4. Chapter 12 describes experimental design, while Chapter 15 provides a description and examples of evaluation research. Since evaluation research tends to rely on experimental and quasi-experimental design, this chapter should follow the experimental design chapter.

For the online version of the book, there were no interface issues. The images and charts were clear and readable. The hyperlinks to sources mentioned in the text worked. The Contents menu allowed for easy and quick access to any section of the book. For the PDF version of the book, there were interface issues. The images and charts were clear and readable. However, the URLs and hyperlinks were not active in the PDF version. Furthermore, the PDF version was not bookmarked, which made it more difficult to access specific sections of the book.

I did not find grammatical errors in the book.

Overall, the cultural relevance and sensitivity were consistent with other social science research methods texts. The author does a good job of using both female and male pronouns in the prose. While there are pictures of people of color, there could be more. Most of the pictures are of white people. Also, the context is generally U.S.-centric.

Chapter 1: Introduction to research
Chapter 2: Beginning a research project
Chapter 3: Reading and evaluating literature
Chapter 4: Conducting a literature review
Chapter 5: Ethics in social work research
Chapter 6: Linking methods with theory
Chapter 7: Design and causality
Chapter 8: Creating and refining a research question
Chapter 9: Defining and measuring concepts
Chapter 10: Sampling
Chapter 11: Survey research
Chapter 12: Experimental design
Chapter 13: Interviews and focus groups
Chapter 14: Unobtrusive research: Qualitative and quantitative approaches
Chapter 15: Real-world research: Evaluation, single-subjects, and action research
Chapter 16: Reporting and reading research

Ancillary Material

Open Social Work Education

About the Book

As an introductory textbook for social work students studying research methods, this book guides students through the process of creating a research project. Students will learn how to discover a researchable topic that is interesting to them, examine scholarly literature, formulate a proper research question, design a quantitative or qualitative study to answer their question, carry out the design, interpret quantitative or qualitative results, and disseminate their findings to a variety of audiences. Examples are drawn from the author's practice and research experience, as well as topical articles from the literature.

There are ancillary materials available for this book.

About the Contributors

Matt DeCarlo earned his PhD in social work at Virginia Commonwealth University and is an Assistant Professor of Social Work at Radford University. He earned an MSW from George Mason University in 2010 and a BA in Psychology from the College of William and Mary in 2007. His research interests include open educational resources, self-directed Medicaid supports, and basic income. Matt is an Open Textbook Network Campus Leader for Radford University. He is the founder of Open Social Work Education, a non-profit collaborative advancing OER in social work education.

Contribute to this Page

Social Work Research: Concept, Scope

Last Updated on December 30, 2022 by Team TSW

An effort to create new knowledge or to upgrade existing knowledge either through observation, available facts, evidences or any other method, is research. We often make our mind or take decision, based on our observation about certain objects or phenomena. During whole process we remain unaware of our biases, we do not question them and we attribute our observations entirely to the object being observed. Though it is still possible to arrive at right decision on the basis of wrong reasons or vice versa. This whole thing questions the process of observation. Was the observation error-free? While observing are we aware of our limitations? Every method of observation has certain limitations. Important thing here is to take biases, the errors and limitations into consideration. Social work research is the application of research methods in the field of social work.

Table of Contents

Purpose of social work research is to produce new knowledge or to increase already available knowledge in the field of social work. Social work research gives new dimensions to social work techniques and methods and provides new ways to deal with problems. Social work research attempts to highlight insights about what intervention or treatment is actually helpful in practice and bring the best result. It also throw light on what hinder the attainment of desired goal. It also look for answers to problems faced by practitioners.

Relevance of Research in Social Work

Social work research tries to find answers to questions faced by practitioners and to make existing intervention more effective. The problems are not only professional but personal too. Overall aim is to make existing social work methods and techniques better and more effective.

In social work research, we study the problems from the point of view of professional social work. The designing of research problems, data collection and its interpretation will have to be attempted in a manner as would be useful to professional social work. The process should add new knowledge to social work theory and practice and also to enhance the outcome of professional social workers.

Limitation of Scientific Research Method in Social Work

Social work primarily deals with human behaviour, which is by and large complex and dynamic in nature. This means that different humans tend to behave differently under the same circumstances. One person can be happy in given circumstances and the second may be sad and at the same time others may remain indifferent. So it can easily be deduced that data collected for humans is subjective in nature and means very little for scientific research. Therefore one can not investigate human behaviour under guided conditions as in natural science. This creates many problems for researchers.

Social work will never realize the objective of research as completely as natural science does, but still social work does not completely diminish the importance of scientific research methods.

Social Work is a diverse profession and work almost at all level of social system. Possible broad research areas could be:-

Community health.
Community mental health.
Child welfare.
Women welfare.
Youth welfare.
Juvenile delinquency.
Crime and correction.
Aged welfare.
Poverty alleviation.
Management of Social Welfare Department and Organization.
Disaster Management.
Industrial Social Work.

These are the areas which are very frequently studied by Social workers. Researchers might focus on individuals, families, groups, community or broad social systems.

Facts, events, and evidence help acquire reliable knowledge about various aspects of human behaviour. To get that knowledge, the method of science is still the most commonly used method. Objectivity, replication, prediction and verifiability are the characteristics of scientific approach, which keeps the researchers at bay from their personal biases, beliefs, perceptions, values, attitudes and emotions. With all the limitations and characteristics, scientific research is the best method to arrive at generalization in the field of social work.

You should read this section to situate yourself in terms of what paradigm feels most “at home” to both you as a person and to your project. You may find, as I have, that your research projects are more conventional and less radical than what feels most like home to you, personally. In a research project, however, students should start with their working question rather than their heart. Use the paradigm that fits with your question the best, rather than which paradigm you think fits you the best.

Positivism: Researcher as “expert”

Positivism has its roots in the scientific revolution of the Enlightenment. Positivism is based on the idea that we can come to know facts about the natural world through our experiences of it. The processes that support this are the logical and analytic classification and systemization of these experiences. Through this process of empirical analysis, Positivists aim to arrive at descriptions of law-like relationships and mechanisms that govern the world we experience.

Positivists have traditionally claimed that the only authentic knowledge we have of the world is empirical and scientific. Essentially, positivism downplays any gap between our experiences of the world and the way the world really is; instead, positivism determines objective “facts” through the correct methodological combination of observation and analysis. Data collection methods typically include quantitative measurement, which is supposed to overcome the individual biases of the researcher.

Positivism aspires to high standards of validity and reliability supported by evidence, and has been applied extensively in both physical and social sciences. Its goal is familiar to all students of science: iteratively expanding the evidence base of what we know is true. We can know our observations and analysis describe real world phenomena because researchers separate themselves and objectively observe the world, placing a deep epistemological separation between “the knower” and “what is known” and reducing the possibility of bias. We can all see the logic in separating yourself as much as possible from your study so as not to bias it, even if we know we cannot do so perfectly.

However, the criticism often made of positivism with regard to human and social sciences (e.g. education, psychology, sociology) is that positivism is scientistic ; which is to say that it overlooks differences between the objects in the natural world (tables, atoms, cells, etc.) and the subjects in the social work (self-aware people living in a complex socio-historical context). In pursuit of the generalizable truth of “hard” science, it fails to adequately explain the many aspects of human experience don’t conform to this way of collecting data. Furthermore, by viewing science as an idealized pursuit of pure knowledge, positivists may ignore the many ways in which power structures our access to scientific knowledge, the tools to create it, and the capital to participate in the scientific community.

Kivunja & Kuyini (2017)$^{24}$ describe the essential features of positivism as:

A belief that theory is universal and law-like generalizations can be made across contexts
The assumption that context is not important
The belief that truth or knowledge is ‘out there to be discovered’ by research
The belief that cause and effect are distinguishable and analytically separable
The belief that results of inquiry can be quantified
The belief that theory can be used to predict and to control outcomes
The belief that research should follow the scientific method of investigation
Rests on formulation and testing of hypotheses
Employs empirical or analytical approaches
Pursues an objective search for facts
Believes in ability to observe knowledge
The researcher’s ultimate aim is to establish a comprehensive universal theory, to account for human and social behavior
Application of the scientific method

Many quantitative researchers now identify as postpositivist. Postpositivism retains the idea that truth should be considered objective, but asserts that our experiences of such truths are necessarily imperfect because they are ameliorated by our values and experiences. Understanding how postpositivism has updated itself in light of the developments in other research paradigms is instructive for developing your own paradigmatic framework. Epistemologically, postpositivists operate on the assumption that human knowledge is based not on the assessments from an objective individual, but rather upon human conjectures. As human knowledge is thus unavoidably conjectural and uncertain, though assertions about what is true and why it is true can be modified or withdrawn in the light of further investigation. However, postpositivism is not a form of relativism, and generally retains the idea of objective truth.

These epistemological assumptions are based on ontological assumptions that an objective reality exists, but contra positivists, they believe reality can be known only imperfectly and probabilistically. While positivists believe that research is or can be value-free or value-neutral, postpositivists take the position that bias is undesired but inevitable, and therefore the investigator must work to detect and try to correct it. Postpositivists work to understand how their axiology (i.e., values and beliefs) may have influenced their research, including through their choice of measures, populations, questions, and definitions, as well as through their interpretation and analysis of their work. Methodologically, they use mixed methods and both quantitative and qualitative methods, accepting the problematic nature of “objective” truths and seeking to find ways to come to a better, yet ultimately imperfect understanding of what is true. A popular form of postpositivism is critical realism , which lies between positivism and interpretivism.

Is positivism right for your project?

Positivism is concerned with understanding what is true for everybody. Social workers whose working question fits best with the positivist paradigm will want to produce data that are generalizable and can speak to larger populations. For this reason, positivistic researchers favor quantitative methods—probability sampling, experimental or survey design, and multiple, and well-established instruments to measure key concepts.

A positivist orientation to research is appropriate when your research question asks for generalizable truths. For example, your working question may look something like: does my agency’s housing intervention lead to fewer periods of homelessness for our clients? It is necessary to study such a relationship quantitatively and objectively. When social workers speak about social problems impacting societies and individuals, they reference positivist research, including experiments and surveys of the general populations. Positivist research is exceptionally good at producing cause-and-effect explanations that apply across many different situations and groups of people. There are many good reasons why positivism is the dominant research paradigm in the social sciences.

Critiques of positivism stem from two major issues. First and foremost, positivism may not fit the messy, contradictory, and circular world of human relationships. A positivistic approach does not allow the researcher to understand another person’s subjective mental state in detail. This is because the positivist orientation focuses on quantifiable, generalizable data—and therefore encompasses only a small fraction of what may be true in any given situation. This critique is emblematic of the interpretivist paradigm, which we will describe next.

In the section after that, we will describe the critical paradigm, which critiques the positivist paradigm (and the interpretivist paradigm) for focusing too little on social change, values, and oppression. Positivists assume they know what is true, but they often do not incorporate the knowledge and experiences of oppressed people, even when those community members are directly impacted by the research. Positivism has been critiqued as ethnocentrist, patriarchal, and classist (Kincheloe & Tobin, 2009).$^{25}$ This leads them to do research on , rather than with populations by excluding them from the conceptualization, design, and impact of a project, a topic we discussed in section 2.4. It also leads them to ignore the historical and cultural context that is important to understanding the social world. The result can be a one-dimensional and reductionist view of reality.

From your literature search, identify an empirical article that uses quantitative methods to answer a research question similar to your working question or about your research topic.
Review the assumptions of the positivist research paradigm.
Discuss in a few sentences how the author’s conclusions are based on some of these paradigmatic assumptions. How might a researcher operating from a different paradigm (e.g., interpretivism, critical) critique these assumptions as well as the conclusions of this study?

Interpretivism: Researcher as “empathizer”

Positivism is focused on generalizable truth. Interpretivism , by contrast, develops from the idea that we want to understand the truths of individuals, how they interpret and experience the world, their thought processes, and the social structures that emerge from sharing those interpretations through language and behavior. The process of interpretation (or social construction) is guided by the empathy of the researcher to understand the meaning behind what other people say.

Historically, interpretivism grew out of a specific critique of positivism: that knowledge in the human and social sciences cannot conform to the model of natural science because there are features of human experience that cannot objectively be “known”. The tools we use to understand objects that have no self-awareness may not be well-attuned to subjective experiences like emotions, understandings, values, feelings, socio-cultural factors, historical influences, and other meaningful aspects of social life. Instead of finding a single generalizable “truth,” the interpretivist researcher aims to generate understanding and often adopts a relativist position.

While positivists seek “the truth,” the social constructionist framework argues that “truth” varies. Truth differs based on who you ask, and people change what they believe is true based on social interactions. These subjective truths also exist within social and historical contexts, and our understanding of truth varies across communities and time periods. This is because we, according to this paradigm, create reality ourselves through our social interactions and our interpretations of those interactions. Key to the interpretivist perspective is the idea that social context and interaction frame our realities.

Researchers operating within this framework take keen interest in how people come to socially agree, or disagree, about what is real and true. Consider how people, depending on their social and geographical context, ascribe different meanings to certain hand gestures. When a person raises their middle finger, those of us in Western cultures will probably think that this person isn’t very happy (not to mention the person at whom the middle finger is being directed!). In other societies around the world, a thumbs-up gesture, rather than a middle finger, signifies discontent (Wong, 2007).$^{26}$ The fact that these hand gestures have different meanings across cultures aptly demonstrates that those meanings are socially and collectively constructed. What, then, is the “truth” of the middle finger or thumbs up? As we’ve seen in this section, the truth depends on the intention of the person making the gesture, the interpretation of the person receiving it, and the social context in which the action occurred.

Qualitative methods are preferred as ways to investigate these phenomena. Data collected might be unstructured (or “messy”) and correspondingly a range of techniques for approaching data collection have been developed. Interpretivism acknowledges that it is impossible to remove cultural and individual influence from research, often instead making a virtue of the positionality of the researcher and the socio-cultural context of a study.

One common objection positivists levy against interpretivists is that interpretivism tends to emphasize the subjective over the objective. If the starting point for an investigation is that we can’t fully and objectively know the world, how can we do research into this without everything being a matter of opinion? For the positivist, this risk for confirmation bias as well as invalid and unreliable measures makes interpretivist research unscientific. Clearly, we disagree with this assessment, and you should, too. Positivism and interpretivism have different ontologies and epistemologies with contrasting notions of rigor and validity (for more information on assumptions about measurement, see Chapter 11 for quantitative validity and reliability and Chapter 20 for qualitative rigor). Nevertheless, both paradigms apply the values and concepts of the scientific method through systematic investigation of the social world, even if their assumptions lead them to do so in different ways. Interpretivist research often embraces a relativist epistemology, bringing together different perspectives in search of a trustworthy and authentic understanding or narrative.

Kivunja & Kuyini (2017)$^{27}$ describe the essential features of interpretivism as:

The belief that truths are multiple and socially constructed
The acceptance that there is inevitable interaction between the researcher and his or her research participants
The acceptance that context is vital for knowledge and knowing
The belief that knowledge can be value laden and the researcher’s values need to be made explicit
The need to understand specific cases and contexts rather deriving universal laws that apply to everyone, everywhere.
The belief that causes and effects are mutually interdependent, and that causality may be circular or contradictory
The belief that contextual factors need to be taken into consideration in any systematic pursuit of understanding

One important clarification: it’s important to think of the interpretivist perspective as not just about individual interpretations but the social life of interpretations. While individuals may construct their own realities, groups—from a small one such as a married couple to large ones such as nations—often agree on notions of what is true and what “is” and what “is not.” In other words, the meanings that we construct have power beyond the individuals who create them. Therefore, the ways that people and communities act based on such meanings is of as much interest to interpretivists as how they were created in the first place. Theories like social constructionism, phenomenology, and symbolic interactionism are often used in concert with interpretivism.

Is interpretivism right for your project?

An interpretivist orientation to research is appropriate when your working question asks about subjective truths. The cause-and-effect relationships that interpretivist studies produce are specific to the time and place in which the study happened, rather than a generalizable objective truth. More pragmatically, if you picture yourself having a conversation with participants like an interview or focus group, then interpretivism is likely going to be a major influence for your study.

Positivists critique the interpretivist paradigm as non-scientific. They view the interpretivist focus on subjectivity and values as sources of bias. Positivists and interpretivists differ on the degree to which social phenomena are like natural phenomena. Positivists believe that the assumptions of the social sciences and natural sciences are the same, while interpretivists strongly believe that social sciences differ from the natural sciences because their subjects are social creatures.

Similarly, the critical paradigm finds fault with the interpretivist focus on the status quo rather than social change. Although interpretivists often proceed from a feminist or other standpoint theory, the focus is less on liberation than on understanding the present from multiple perspectives. Other critical theorists may object to the consensus orientation of interpretivist research. By searching for commonalities between people’s stories, they may erase the uniqueness of each individual’s story. For example, while interpretivists may arrive at a consensus definition of what the experience of “coming out” is like for people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer, it cannot represent the diversity of each person’s unique “coming out” experience and what it meant to them. For example, see Rosario and colleagues’ (2009)${28}$ critique the literature on lesbians “coming out” because previous studies did not addressing how appearing, behaving, or identifying as a butch or femme impacted the experience of “coming out” for lesbians.

From your literature search, identify an empirical article that uses qualitative methods to answer a research question similar to your working question or about your research topic.
Review the assumptions of the interpretivist research paradigm.
Discuss in a few sentences how the author’s conclusions are based on some of these paradigmatic assumptions. How might a researcher operating from a different paradigm (like positivism or the critical paradigm) critique the conclusions of this study?

Critical paradigm: Researcher as “activist”

As we’ve discussed a bit in the preceding sections, the critical paradigm focuses on power, inequality, and social change. Although some rather diverse perspectives are included here, the critical paradigm, in general, includes ideas developed by early social theorists, such as Max Horkheimer (Calhoun et al., 2007),$^{29}$ and later works developed by feminist scholars, such as Nancy Fraser (1989).$^{30}$ Unlike the positivist paradigm, the critical paradigm assumes that social science can never be truly objective or value-free. Furthermore, this paradigm operates from the perspective that scientific investigation should be conducted with the express goal of social change. Researchers in the critical paradigm foreground axiology, positionality and values . In contrast with the detached, “objective” observations associated with the positivist researcher, critical approaches make explicit the intention for research to act as a transformative or emancipatory force within and beyond the study.

Researchers in the critical paradigm might start with the knowledge that systems are biased against certain groups, such as women or ethnic minorities, building upon previous theory and empirical data. Moreover, their research projects are designed not only to collect data, but to impact the participants as well as the systems being studied. The critical paradigm applies its study of power and inequality to change those power imbalances as part of the research process itself. If this sounds familiar to you, you may remember hearing similar ideas when discussing social conflict theory in your human behavior in the social environment (HBSE) class.$^{31}$ Because of this focus on social change, the critical paradigm is a natural home for social work research. However, we fall far short of adopting this approach widely in our profession’s research efforts.

Is the critical paradigm right for your project?

Every social work research project impacts social justice in some way. What distinguishes critical research is how it integrates an analysis of power into the research process itself. Critical research is appropriate for projects that are activist in orientation. For example, critical research projects should have working questions that explicitly seek to raise the consciousness of an oppressed group or collaborate equitably with community members and clients to addresses issues of concern. Because of their transformative potential, critical research projects can be incredibly rewarding to complete. However, partnerships take a long time to develop and social change can evolve slowly on an issue, making critical research projects a more challenging fit for student research projects which must be completed under a tight deadline with few resources.

Positivists critique the critical paradigm on multiple fronts. First and foremost, the focus on oppression and values as part of the research process is seen as likely to bias the research process, most problematically, towards confirmation bias. If you start out with the assumption that oppression exists and must be dealt with, then you are likely to find that regardless of whether it is truly there or not. Similarly, positivists may fault critical researchers for focusing on how the world should be, rather than how it truly is . In this, they may focus too much on theoretical and abstract inquiry and less on traditional experimentation and empirical inquiry. Finally, the goal of social transformation is seen as inherently unscientific, as science is not a political practice.

Interpretivists often find common cause with critical researchers. Feminist studies, for example, may explore the perspectives of women while centering gender-based oppression as part of the research process. In interpretivist research, the focus is less on radical change as part of the research process and more on small, incremental changes based on the results and conclusions drawn from the research project. Additionally, some critical researchers’ focus on individuality of experience is in stark contrast to the consensus-orientation of interpretivists. Interpretivists seek to understand people’s true selves. Some critical theorists argue that people have multiple selves or no self at all.

From your literature search, identify an article relevant to your working question or broad research topic that uses a critical perspective. You should look for articles where the authors are clear that they are applying a critical approach to research like feminism, anti-racism, Marxism and critical theory, decolonization, anti-oppressive practice, or other social justice-focused theoretical perspectives. To target your search further, include keywords in your queries to research methods commonly used in the critical paradigm like participatory action research and community-based participatory research. If you have trouble identifying an article for this exercise, consult your professor for some help. These articles may be more challenging to find, but reviewing one is necessary to get a feel for what research in this paradigm is like.
Review the assumptions of the critical research paradigm.
Discuss in a few sentences how the author’s conclusions are based on some of these paradigmatic assumptions. How might a researcher operating from different assumptions (like values-neutrality or researcher as neutral and unbiased) critique the conclusions of this study?

Pragmatism: Researcher as “strategist”

“Essentially, all models are wrong but some are useful.” (Box, 1976)$^{32}$

Pragmatism is a research paradigm that suspends questions of philosophical ‘truth’ and focuses more on how different philosophies, theories, and methods can be used strategically to provide a multidimensional view of a topic. Researchers employing pragmatism will mix elements of positivist, interpretivist, and critical research depending on the purpose of a particular project and the practical constraints faced by the researcher and their research context. We favor this approach for student projects because it avoids getting bogged down in choosing the “right” paradigm and instead focuses on the assumptions that help you answer your question, given the limitations of your research context. Student research projects are completed quickly and moving in the direction of pragmatism can be a route to successfully completing a project. Your project is a representation of what you think is feasible, ethical, and important enough for you to study.

The crucial consideration for the pragmatist is whether the outcomes of research have any real-world application, rather than whether they are “true.” The methods, theories, and philosophies chosen by pragmatic researchers are guided by their working question. There are no distinctively pragmatic research methods since this approach is about making judicious use whichever methods fit best with the problem under investigation. Pragmatic approaches may be less likely to prioritize ontological, epistemological or axiological consistency when combining different research methods. Instead, the emphasis is on solving a pressing problem and adapting to the limitations and opportunities in the researchers’ context.

Adopt a multi-paradigmatic perspective

Believe it or not, there is a long literature of acrimonious conflict between scientists from positivist, interpretivist, and critical camps (see Heineman-Pieper et al., 2002 $^{33}$ for a longer discussion). Pragmatism is an old idea, but it is appealing precisely because it attempts to resolve the problem of multiple incompatible philosophical assumptions in social science. To a pragmatist, there is no “correct” paradigm. All paradigms rely on assumptions about the social world that are the subject of philosophical debate. Each paradigm is an incomplete understanding of the world, and it requires a scientific community using all of them to gain a comprehensive view of the social world. This multi-paradigmatic perspective is a unique gift of social work research, as our emphasis on empathy and social change makes us more critical of positivism, the dominant paradigm in social science.

We offered the metaphors of expert, empathizer, activist, and strategist for each paradigm. It’s important not to take these labels too seriously. For example, some may view that scientists should be experts or that activists are biased and unscientific. Nevertheless, we hope that these metaphors give you a sense of what it feels like to conduct research within each paradigm.

One of the unique aspects of paradigmatic thinking is that often where you think you are most at home may actually be the opposite of where your research project is. For example, in my graduate and doctoral education, I thought I was a critical researcher. In fact, I thought I was a radical researcher focused on social change and transformation. Yet, often times when I sit down to conceptualize and start a research project, I find myself squarely in the positivist paradigm, thinking through neat cause-and-effect relationships that can be mathematically measured. There is nothing wrong with that! Your task for your research project is to find the paradigm that best matches your research question. Think through what you really want to study and how you think about the topic, then use assumptions of that paradigm to guide your inquiry.

Another important lesson is that no research project fits perfectly in one paradigm or another. Instead, there is a spectrum along which studies are, to varying degrees, interpretivist, positivist, and critical. For example, all social work research is a bit activist in that our research projects are designed to inform action for change on behalf of clients and systems. However, some projects will focus on the conclusions and implications of projects informing social change (i.e., positivist and interpretivist projects) while others will partner with community members and design research projects collaboratively in a way that leads to social change (i.e. critical projects). In section 7.5, we will describe a pragmatic approach to research design guided by your paradigmatic and theoretical framework.

Key Takeaways

Social work research falls, to some degree, in each of the four paradigms: positivism, interpretivism, critical, and pragmatist.
Adopting a pragmatic, multi-paradigmatic approach to research makes sense for student researchers, as it directs students to use the philosophical assumptions and methodological approaches that best match their research question and research context.
Research in all paradigms is necessary to come to a comprehensive understanding of a topic, and social workers must be able to understand and apply knowledge from each research paradigm.
Describe which paradigm best fits your perspective on the world and which best fits with your project.
Identify any similarities and differences in your personal assumptions and the assumption your research project relies upon. For example, are you a more critical and radical thinker but have chosen a more “expert” role for yourself in your research project?

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

7 7. Theory and paradigm

Chapter Outline

Assumptions of social work research (22 minute read time)
Social work research paradigms (21 minute read time)
Theory and research (7 minute read time)
Theory and paradigm in your project (11 minute read time)

Content warning: examples in this chapter contain references to post-traumatic stress disorder and similar culture-bound syndromes, trauma, colonization and Global North/West hegemony, sexism in medical science and STEM fields, dropping out of high school, poverty, addiction and the disease model, police violence and systematic racism, rape culture, depression, homelessness, “coming out” as LGBTQ+, and sexual harassment.

7.1 Assumptions of social work research

Learning Objectives

Learners will be able to…

Ground your research project and working question in the foundational assumptions of social science
Define the terms ‘ ontology ‘ and ‘ epistemology ‘ and explain how they relate to quantitative, qualitative, and critical research projects
Apply feminist, anti-racist, and decolonization critiques to your existing understanding of social science

At this point in the textbook, you have created a working question, reviewed the literature on your topic, and revised your working question to be more specific and clear based on what you learn in the literature. As you read more about your topic, you will develop a clear understanding of how a research project that you conduct can make a unique contribution to social work and social science.

In Chapter 3-5, we talked briefly about grounding what you think about your topic in both empirical information, the outcomes of qualitative and quantitative studies, as well as social theory. In this chapter and the next, we will build on the latter source of information about your topic, social theory. We will investigate the philosophical foundations of theories in this chapter, and in Chapter 6, we will talk about how theory and research inform one another.

No wait, don’t leave! I’ve heard from students who hear the word ‘ philosophy ‘ and think “this is above my head,” and tune out. That’s totally understandable. Although it may not seem like it right now, your project will benefit from a strong connection to previous theoretical and philosophical ideas about your topic. Moreover, the philosophical questions we review here should inform how you understand different theories and practice modalities in social work, as they deal with the bedrock questions about science and human knowledge.

The terms ‘ paradigm ‘ and ‘ theory ‘ are often used interchangeably in social science. There is not a consensus among social scientists as to whether these are identical or distinct concepts. With that said, in this text, we will make a clear distinction between the two ideas because thinking about each concept separately is more useful for our purposes. We define paradigm as a way of viewing the world (or “analytic lens” akin to a set of glasses) and a framework from which to understand the human experience (Kuhn, 1962). [1] Seeing things through one lens (i.e., paradigm) can help you think about things in a new way, and learning about the assumptions of each paradigm can help you develop fluency in switching between them to capture the complex reality of a situation.

As you read this section, try to think about which assumptions feels right for your working question and research project. Which assumptions match what you think and believe about your topic? The goal is not to find the “right” answer, but to ground how you think about your topic.

Assumptions about what is real

In section 1.2, we reviewed the two types of truth that social work researchers seek— objective truth and subjective truths —and linked these with the methods—quantitative and qualitative—that researchers use to study the world. If those ideas aren’t fresh in your mind, you may want to navigate back to that section and review objective truth and subjective truths.

These two types of truth rely on different assumptions about what is real in the social world—i.e., they have a different ontology . At first, it may seem silly to question whether the phenomena we encounter in the social world are real. Of course you exist, your thoughts exist, your computer exists, and your friends exist. You can see them with your eyes.

This is the ontological framework of realism , which simply means that the concepts we talk about in science exist independent of observation (Burrell & Morgan, 1979). [2] Obviously, when we close our eyes, the universe does not disappear. You may be familiar with the philosophical conundrum: “If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?”

The natural sciences, like physics and biology, also generally rely on the assumption of realism. For example, we assume that gravity is real and that the mitochondria of a cell are real. Mitochondria are easy to spot with a powerful microscope and we can observe and theorize about their function in a cell. The gravitational force is invisible, but clearly apparent from observable facts, such as watching an apple fall from a tree. The theories about gravity have changed over the years. Improvements were made when observations could not be correctly interpreted using existing theories.

As we discussed in section 1.2, culture-bound syndromes are an excellent example of where you might come to question realism. Of course, from a Western perspective as researchers in the United States, we think that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) classification of mental health disorders is real and that these culture-bound syndromes are mostly in people’s minds. But what about if you were a person from Korea experiencing Hwabyeong? Wouldn’t you consider the Western diagnosis of somatization disorder to be incorrect or incomplete? This conflict raises the question–do either Hwabyeong or DSM diagnoses like post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) really exist at all…or are they just social constructs that only exist in our minds?

If your answer is “no, they do not exist,” you are adopting the ontology of anti-realism , or the idea that social concepts do not exist outside of human thought. Unlike the realists who seek a single, universal truth, the anti-realists perceive a sea of truths, created and shared within a social and cultural context. Unlike objective truth, which is true for all, subjective truths will vary based on who you are observing and the context in which you are observing them. The beliefs, opinions, and preferences of people are actually truths that social scientists measure and describe. Additionally, subjective truths do not exist independent of human observation because they are the product of the human mind. We negotiate what is true in the social world through language, arriving at a consensus and engaging in debate within our socio-cultural context.

These theoretical assumptions should sound familiar if you’ve studied social constructivism or symbolic interactionism in your other MSW courses, most likely in human behavior in the social environment (HBSE). [3] From an anti-realist perspective, what distinguishes the social sciences from natural sciences is human thought. When we try to conceptualize trauma from an anti-realist perspective, we must pay attention to the feelings, opinions, and stories in people’s minds. In their most radical formulations, anti-realists propose that these feelings and stories are all that truly exist.

What happens when a situation is incorrectly interpreted? While a person’s interpretation may be incorrect, they think they are right. Thus, what may not be objectively true for everyone is nevertheless true to the individual interpreting the situation. Furthermore, they act on the assumption that they are right. In this sense, even incorrect interpretations are truths, even though they are true only to one person. This leads us to question whether the social concepts we think about really exist. They might only exist in our minds, unlike concepts from the natural sciences which exist independent of thought. For example, if everyone ceased to believe in gravity, we wouldn’t all float away. It has an existence independent of human thought.

How do we resolve this dichotomy? As social workers, we know that often times what appears to be an either/or situation is actually a both/and situation. There is an objective thing called trauma. We can draw out objective facts about trauma and how it interacts with other concepts in the social world such as intimate relationships or mental health. However, that understanding is always bound within a specific cultural and historical context. Moreover, each person’s individual experience and conceptualization of trauma is also true. If a person tells you what their trauma means to them, it is real even though only they experience and know it that way. By using both objective and subjective analytic lenses, we can explore different aspects of trauma—what it means to everyone, always, everywhere, and what is means to one person or group of people, in a specific place and time.

Assumptions about how we study truth

Having discussed what is true, we can proceed to the next natural question—how can we come to know what is real and true? This is epistemology , or our assumptions about how we come to know what is real and true. Again, we began this discussion in Chapter 1 when we described the scientific method and objective and subjective truths. Epistemological subjectivism focuses on what people think and feel about a situation, while epistemological objectivism focuses on objective facts irrelevant to our interpretation of a situation (Lin, 2015). [4]

While there are many important questions about epistemology to ask (e.g., “How can I be sure of what I know?” or “What can I not know?” see Willis, 2007 [5] for more), from a pragmatic perspective most relevant epistemological question in the social sciences is whether truth is better accessed using numbers or words. Generally, scientists approaching research with an objective epistemology (and realist ontology) will use quantitative methods to arrive at scientific truth. Quantitative methods examine numerical data to precisely describe and predict elements of the social world. For example, while people can have different definitions for poverty, an objective measurement such as an annual income of “less than $25,100 for a family of four” provides a precise measurement that can be compared to incomes from all other people in any society from any time period, and refers to real quantities of money that exist in the world. Mathematical relationships are uniquely useful in that they allow comparisons across individuals as well as time and space. In this book, we will review the most common designs used in quantitative research: surveys and experiments. These types of studies usually rely on the epistemological assumption that mathematics can represent the phenomena and relationships we observe in the social world.

Although mathematical relationships are useful, they are limited in what they can tell you. While you can learn use quantitative methods to measure individuals’ experiences and thought processes, you will miss the story behind the numbers. To analyze stories scientifically, we need to examine words using qualitative methods . Because social science studies human interaction and the reality we all create and share in our heads, subjectivists focus on language and how we communicate our inner experience. Qualitative methods allow us to scientifically investigate language–to pursue research questions that explore the words people write and speak. This is consistent with epistemological subjectivism’s focus on individual and shared experiences, interpretations, and stories.

It is important to note that qualitative methods are entirely compatible with seeking objective truth. Approaching qualitative analysis with a more objective perspective, we look simply at what was said and examine its surface-level meaning. If a person says they brought their kids to school that day, then that is what is true. A researcher seeking subjective truth may focus on how the person says the words—their tone of voice, facial expressions, and so forth. By focusing on these things, the researcher can understand what it meant to the person to say they dropped their kids off at school. Perhaps in describing dropping their children off at school, the person winced, which could show that the drop-off was a difficult experience for the person. In this way, subjective truths are deeper, more personalized, and difficult to generalize.

Are you more concerned with how people think and feel about your topic, their subjective truths?
Or are you more concerned with the objective facts of the situation?
Using your answer to the above question, describe how either quantitative or qualitative methods make the most sense for project.

Assumptions about the researcher’s frame of reference

So far, we have talked about knowledge as it exists in the world, but what about the process of research itself? Doesn’t the researcher bring their own biases, perspectives, and experiences to the process? The critique of science as an enterprise dominated by the perspectives of white men from North America and Europe is one that has had a profound impact on how we view knowledge. Because scientists design research studies, create measures, and interpret results, there is always the risk that a scientist’s objectivity slips and as a result, biases are expressed.

Social work is concerned with the “isms” of oppression (ableism, ageism, cissexism, classism, heterosexism, racism, sexism, etc.), and so our approach to science must reconcile its history as both a tool of oppression and its exclusion of oppressed groups. Science grew out of the Enlightenment, a philosophical movement which applied reason and empirical analysis to understanding the world. While the Enlightenment brought forth tremendous achievements, the critiques of Marxian, feminist, and other critical theorists complicated the Enlightenment understanding of science. For this section, I will focus on feminist critiques of science, building upon an entry in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Crasnow, Wylie, Bauchspies, & Potter, 2018).

In its original formulation, science was an individualistic endeavor. As we learned in Chapter 1, a basic statement of the scientific method is that a researcher studies existing theories on a topic, formulates a hypothesis about what might be true, and either confirms or disconfirms their hypothesis through experiment and rigorous observation. Over time, our theories become more accurate in their predictions and more comprehensive in their conclusions. Scientists put aside their preconceptions, look at the data, and build their theories based on objective rationality.

Yet, this cannot be perfectly true. Scientists are human, after all. As a profession historically dominated by white men, scientists have dismissed women and other minorities as being psychologically unfit for the scientific profession. While attitudes have improved, science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM) and related fields remain dominated by white men (Grogan, 2019) [6] . Biases can persist in social work theory when social workers do not have similar experiences to the populations they study.

Gender bias can influence the research questions scientists choose to answer. Feminist critiques of medical science drew attention to women’s health issues, spurring research and changing standards of care. The focus on domestic violence in the empirical literature can also be seen as a result of feminist critique. Thus, critical theory helps us critique what is on the agenda for science. If science is to answer important questions, it must incorporate perspectives of all people.

Similarly, many of the older, classic social science theories were developed based on research which observed males or from university students in the United States or other Western nations. How these observations were made, what questions were asked, and how the data were interpreted were shaped by the same oppressive forces that existed in broader society, a process that continues into the present. In psychology, the concept of hysteria or hysterical women was believed to be caused by a wandering womb (Tasca et al., 2012). [7] Even today, there are gender biases in diagnoses of histrionic personality disorder and racial biases in psychotic disorders (Klonsky et al., 2002) [8] because the theories underlying them were created in a sexist and racist culture. In these ways, science can reinforce the truth of the white Western male perspective.

Finally, it is important to note that social science research is often conducted on populations rather than with populations. Historically, this has often meant Western men traveling to other countries and seeking to understand other cultures through a Western lens. Lacking cultural humility and failing to engage stakeholders, ethnocentric research of this sort has led to the view of non-Western cultures as inferior. Moreover, the use of these populations as research subjects rather than co-equal participants in the research process privileges the researcher’s knowledge over that from other groups or cultures. Researchers working with indigenous cultures, in particular, had a destructive habit of conducting research for a short time and then leaving, without regard for the impact their study had on the population. These critiques of Western science aim to decolonize social science, ridding it of the racist ideas the oppress indigenous and non-Western peoples (Smith, 2013). [9]

Reflect on the biases you bring to researching your topic as well as the limitations of your knowledge, given your identities and experiences.
Describe how previous or current studies and theories about your topic have been influenced by oppressive forces such as racism and sexism.

Assumptions about human action

When scientists observe social phenomena, they often take the perspective of determinism , meaning that what is seen is the result of processes that occurred earlier in time (i.e., cause and effect). As you will see in chapter 8, this process is represented in the classical formulation of a research question which asks “what is the relationship between X (cause) and Y (effect)?” By framing a research question in such a way, the scientist is disregarding any reciprocal influence that Y has on X. Moreover, the scientist also excludes human agency from the equation. It is simply that a cause will necessitate an effect. For example, a researcher might find that few people living in neighborhoods with higher rates of poverty graduate from high school, and thus conclude that poverty causes adolescents to drop out of school. This conclusion, however, does not address the story behind the numbers. Each person who is counted as graduating or dropping out has a unique story of why they made the choices they did. Perhaps they had a mentor or parent that helped them succeed. Perhaps they faced the choice between employment to support family members or continuing in school.

For this reason, determinism is critiqued as reductionistic in the social sciences because people have agency over their actions. This is unlike the natural sciences like physics. While a table isn’t aware of the friction it has with the floor, parents and children are likely aware of the friction in their relationships and act based on how they interpret that conflict. The opposite of determinism is free will , that humans can choose how they act and their behavior and thoughts are not solely determined by what happened prior in a neat, cause-and-effect relationship. Researchers adopting a perspective of free will view the process of, continuing with our education example, seeking higher education as the result of a number of mutually influencing forces and the spontaneous and implicit processes of human thought. For these researchers, the picture painted by determinism is too simplistic.

A similar dichotomy can be found in the debate between individualism and holism . When you hear something like “the disease model of addiction leads to policies that pathologize and oppress people who use drugs,” the speaker is making a methodologically holistic argument. He or she is making a claim that abstract social forces (the disease model, policies) can cause things to change. A methodological individualist would critique this argument by saying that the disease model of addiction doesn’t actually cause anything by itself. From this perspective, it is the individuals, rather than any abstract social force, who oppress people who use drugs. The disease model itself doesn’t cause anything to change; the individuals who follow the precepts of the disease model are the agents who actually oppress people in reality. To an individualist, all social phenomena are the result of individual human action. To a holist, social forces can influence each other without necessitating an explanation of how individuals impacted that process.

Is human action, or free will, central to how you understand your topic?
Or are humans more passive and what happens to them more determined by the social forces that influence their life?
Reflect on how your project’s assumptions may differ from your own assumptions about free will and determinism. For example, my beliefs about self-determination and free will always inform my social work practice. However, my working question and research project may rely on social theories that are deterministic and do not address human agency.

Assumptions about the social world

Another assumption scientists make is around the nature of the social world. Is it an orderly place that remains relatively stable over time? Or is it a place of constant change and conflict? The view of the social world as an orderly place can help a researcher describe how things fit together to create a cohesive whole. For example, systems theory can help you understand how different systems interact with and influence one another, drawing energy from one place to another through an interconnected network with a tendency towards homeostasis. This is a more consensus -focused and status-quo-oriented perspective. Yet, this view of the social world cannot adequately explain the radical shifts and revolutions that occur. It also leaves little room for human action and free will. In this more radical space, change consists of the fundamental assumptions about how the social world works.

For example, at the time of this writing, protests are taking place across the world to remember the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police and other victims of police violence and systematic racism. Public support of Black Lives Matter , an anti-racist activist group that focuses on police violence and criminal justice reform, has experienced a radical shift in public support in just two weeks since the killing, equivalent to the previous 21 months of advocacy and social movement organizing (Cohn & Quealy, 2020). Abolition of police and prisons , once a fringe idea, has moved into the conversation about remaking the criminal justice system from the ground-up, centering its historic and current role as an oppressive system for Black Americans. Seemingly overnight, reducing the money spent on police and giving that money to social services became a moderate political position. A researcher centering change may choose to understand this transformation or even incorporate radical anti-racist ideas into the design and methods of their study. Contrastingly, a researcher centering consensus and the status quo might focus on incremental changes what people currently think about the topic. In so doing, it ignores the potential for radical change and social transformation and erases the role that social scientific research can play in actualizing that change.

Research should focus on consensus and the status quo.
Research should address deeper social conflicts and radical change.
Should it help us envision a more radically equitable future?
Or should it assess the world as it is right now?

Assumptions about the purpose of research

Critical and radical views of science focus on how to spread knowledge and information in a way that combats oppression. These questions are central for creating research projects that fight against the objective structures of oppression—like unequal pay—and their subjective counterparts in the mind—like internalized sexism. For example, a more critical research project would fight not only against statutes of limitations for sexual assault but on how women have internalized rape culture as well. Its explicit goal would be to fight oppression and to inform practice on women’s liberation. For this reason, creating change is baked into the research questions and methods used in more critical and radical research projects.

As part of studying radical change and oppression, we are likely employing a model of science that puts values front-and-center within a research project. All social work research is values-driven, as we are a values-driven profession. Historically, though, most social scientists have argued for values-free science. Scientists agree that science helps human progress, but they hold that researchers should remain as objective as possible–which means putting aside politics and personal values that might bias their results, similar to the cognitive biases we discussed in section 1.1. Over the course of last century, this perspective was challenged by scientists who approached research from an explicitly political and values-driven perspective. As we discussed earlier in this chapter, feminist critiques strive to understand how sexism biases research questions, samples, measures, and conclusions, while decolonization critiques try to de-center the Western perspective of science and truth.

It is important to note that both values-central and values-neutral perspectives are useful in furthering social justice. Values-neutral science is helpful at predicting phenomena. Indeed, it matches well with objectivist ontologies and epistemologies. Let’s examine a measure of depression, the Patient Health Questionnaire (PSQ-9) . The authors of this measure spent years creating a measure that accurately and reliably measures the concept of depression. This measure is assumed to measure depression in any person, and scales like this are often translated into other languages (and subsequently validated) for more widespread use . The goal is to measure depression in a valid and reliable manner. We can use this objective measure to predict relationships with other risk and protective factors, such as substance use or resiliency, as well as evaluate the impact of evidence-based treatments for depression like narrative therapy.

While measures like the PSQ-9 help with prediction, they do not allow you to understand an individual person’s experience of depression. To do so, you need to listen to their stories and how they make sense of the world. The goal of understanding isn’t to predict what will happen next, but to empathically connect with the person and truly understand what’s happening from their perspective. Understanding fits best in subjectivist epistemologies and ontologies, as they allow for multiple truths (i.e. that multiple interpretations of the same situation are valid).

Are you looking to be as objective as possible, putting aside your own values?
Or are you infusing values into each aspect of your research design?
Remember that although social work is a values-based profession, that does not mean that all social work research is values-informed. The majority of social work research is objective and tries to be value-neutral in how it approaches research.
Are you trying to predict how one thing will influence another? Or are you instead trying to understand people’s subjective realities?

Putting it all together

As you engage with theoretical and empirical information in social work, keep these paradigmatic assumptions in mind. They are useful shortcuts to understanding the deeper ideas and assumptions behind the construction of knowledge. See Table 7.1 below for a short reference list. The purpose of investigating paradigmatic assumptions isn’t to find out which is true and which is false, or to find the one that speaks to your perspective best. Instead, the goal is to identify the assumptions upon which the knowledge you discover in your research project is based.

Key Takeaways

Philosophers of science disagree on the basic tenets of what is true, how we come to know what is true, the purpose of research, properties of the social world, and the role of the researcher and human agency in the research process.
These paradigmatic considerations cannot be resolved, so social workers use a multi-paradigmatic lens that identifies the assumptions that best match the research question under examination.
“When the scientist observes the social world, he does so objectively.”

7.2 Social work research paradigms

Distinguish between the three major research paradigms in social work and apply the assumptions upon which they are built to a student research project

In the last section, we introduced some of the questions researchers need to ask as they approach scientific inquiry. Hopefully, you followed along with the exercises and reflected on where you project might be situated. In this section, we will build upon these assumptions and detail three paradigms: positivism, interpretivism, and critical, following the framework of Guba and Lincoln (1990) [10] and Burrell and Morgan (1979). [11] Most of social work research and theory can be classified as belonging to one of these three paradigms, though this classification system represents only one of many useful approaches to analyzing social science research paradigms.

These paradigms are three common ways of answering the conflicts we explored in Table 7.1. Some assumptions naturally make sense together, and research paradigms grow out of shared assumptions about social science. It’s important to think of paradigms less as three distinct categories and more as a spectrum along which projects might fall. For example, some projects may be somewhat positivist, somewhat interpretivist, and a little critical. No project fits perfectly into one paradigm, as we discuss in section 7.4.

Additionally, there is no paradigm that is more correct than the other. Each paradigm uses assumptions that are logically consistent, and when combined, are a useful approach to understanding the social world using science. The purpose of this section is to acquaint you with what research projects in each paradigm look like and how they are grounded in philosophical assumptions about social science.

Positivism: Researcher as “expert”

The first paradigm we will review is positivism, or more accurately, post-positivism. It is likely the paradigm that comes to mind when you think about science. Positivism is concerned with understanding what is true for everybody. Social workers whose working question fits best with the positivist paradigm will want to cite studies that are generalizable and can speak to larger populations. For this reason, positivistic researchers favor quantitative methods—probability sampling, experimental or survey design, and multiple, and well-established instruments to measure key concepts. Table 7.2 describes the main assumptions of positivism in terms of the core questions we posed in section 7.1.

Critiques of positivism stem from two major issues. First and foremost, positivism may not fit the messy, contradictory, and circular world of human relationships. A positivistic approach does not allow the researcher to understand another person’s mental state. This is because the positivist orientation focuses on quantifiable, generalizable data – and therefore encompasses only a small fraction of what may be true in any given situation. This critique is emblematic of the interpretivist paradigm, which we will describe next.

In the section after that, we will describe the critical paradigm, which critiques the positivist paradigm (and the interpretivist paradigm) for focusing too little on social change, values, and oppression. Positivists assume they know what is true, but they often do not incorporate the knowledge and experiences of oppressed people, even when those community members are directly impacted by the research. Positivism has been critiqued as ethnocentrist, patriarchal, and classist (Kincheloe & Tobin, 2009). [12] This leads them to do research on , rather than with populations by excluding them from the conceptualization, design, and impact of a project, a topic we discussed in section 2.4. It also leads them to ignore the historical and cultural context that is important to understanding the social world. The result is a one-dimensional and reductionistic view of reality.

From your literature search, identify an empirical article that uses quantitative methods to answer a research question similar to your working question or about your research topic.
Review the assumptions of the positivist research paradigm and how it resolves each conflict.
How might a researcher operating from different assumptions (like anti-realism or free will) critique the conclusions of your study?
Reflect on how the truth gained from positivistic inquiry focuses on generalizability and prediction, attempting to establish what is broadly true for a population.

Interpretivism: Researcher as “empathizer”

Interpretivism develops from the idea that we want to understand the truths of individuals, how they interpret and understand the world, their thought processes, and the social structures that emerge from sharing those interpretations through language and behavior. The process of social construction is guided by the empathy of the researcher to understand the meaning behind what other people say.

While positivists seek “the truth,” the social constructionist framework argues that “truth” varies. Truth differs based on who you ask, and people change their definitions of truth based on social interactions. Truth also exists within social and historical contexts, as our understanding of truth varies across communities and time periods. This is because we, according to this paradigm, create reality ourselves through our social interactions and our interpretations of those interactions. Key to the interpretivist perspective is the idea that social context and interaction frame our realities.

Researchers operating within this framework take keen interest in how people come to socially agree, or disagree, about what is real and true. Consider how people, depending on their social and geographical context, ascribe different meanings to certain hand gestures. When a person raises their middle finger, those of us in Western cultures will probably think that this person isn’t very happy (not to mention the person at whom the middle finger is being directed!). In other societies around the world, a thumbs-up gesture, rather than a middle finger, signifies discontent (Wong, 2007). [13] The fact that these hand gestures have different meanings across cultures aptly demonstrates that those meanings are socially and collectively constructed. What, then, is the “truth” of the middle finger or thumbs up? As we’ve seen in this section, the truth depends on the intention of the person making the gesture, the interpretation of the person receiving it, and the social context in which the action occurred.

It would be a mistake to think of the interpretivist perspective as only individualistic. While individuals may construct their own realities, groups—from a small one such as a married couple to large ones such as nations—often agree on notions of what is true and what “is” and what “is not.” In other words, the meanings that we construct have power beyond the individuals who create them. Therefore, the ways that people and communities work to create and change such meanings is of as much interest to interpretivists as how they were created in the first place.

Similarly, the critical paradigm finds fault with the interpretivist focus on the status quo rather than social change. Although interpretivists often proceed from a feminist or other standpoint theory, the focus is less on liberation than on understanding the present from multiple perspectives. Other critical theorists may object to the consensus orientation of interpretivist research. By searching for commonalities between people’s stories, they may erase the uniqueness of each individual’s story. For example, while interpretivists may arrive at a consensus definition of what the experience of “coming out” is like for people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer, it cannot represent the diversity of each person’s unique “coming out” experience and what it meant to them. For example, see Rosario and colleague’s (2009) [14] critique the literature on lesbians “coming out” because previous studies did not addressing how acting or looking like a butch or femme impacted the experience of “coming out.”

From your literature search, identify an empirical article that uses qualitative methods to answer a research question similar to your working question or about your research topic.
Review the assumptions of the interpretivist research paradigm and how it resolves each conflict.
How might a researcher operating from different assumptions (like realism or determinism) critique the conclusions of your study?
Reflect on how the truth gained from interpretivistic inquiry focuses on the embeddedness of our ideas within our own consciousness, our relationships, and our cultural and historical context. The goal is to understand deep truths about a specific person or small group of people, rather than establishing what is broadly true for a large population.

Critical paradigm: Researcher as “activist”

Researchers in the critical paradigm might start with the knowledge that systems are biased against certain groups, such as women or ethnic minorities. Moreover, their research projects are designed not only to collect data, but to impact the participants as well as the systems being studied. The critical paradigm not only studies power imbalances but seeks to change those power imbalances as part of the research process itself. If this sounds familiar to you, you may remember hearing similar ideas when discussing social conflict theory in your human behavior in the social environment (HBSE) class. [17] Because of this focus on social change, the critical paradigm is a natural home for social work research.

Positivists critique the critical paradigm on multiple fronts. First and foremost, the focus on oppression and values as part of the research process is seen as likely to bias the research process, most problematically, towards confirmation bias. If you start out with the assumption that oppression exists and must be dealt with, then you are likely to find that regardless of whether it is truly there or not. Similarly, positivists may fault critical researchers for focusing on how the world should be, rather than how it truly is. In this, they may focus too much on theoretical and abstract inquiry and less on traditional experimentation and empirical inquiry. Finally, the goal of social transformation is seen as inherently unscientific, as science is not a political practice.

Interpretivists often find common cause with critical researchers. Feminist studies, for example, may explore the perspectives of women while centering gender-based oppression as part of the research process. In interpretivist research, the focus is less on radical change as part of the research process and more on small, incremental changes based on the results and conclusions drawn from the research project. Additionally, some critical researchers’ focus on individuality of experience is in stark contrast to the consensus-orientation of interpretivists. Interpretivists seek to understand people’s true selves, while critical theorists argue that people have multiple selves or no self at all.

From your literature search, identify an article relevant to your working question or broad research topic that uses a critical perspective. You should look for articles where the authors are clear that they are applying a critical approach to research like feminism, anti-racism, Marxism and critical theory, decolonization, anti-oppressive practice, or other social justice-informed approaches. If you have trouble identifying one, consult your professor for some help.
Review the assumptions of the critical research paradigm and how it resolves each conflict.
How might a researcher operating from different assumptions (like values-neutrality or researcher as neutral and unbiased) critique the conclusions of your study?
For those assumptions on which the critical paradigm can fall into either side, identify how the author resolves those conflicts and relies on one set of assumptions over another.
Reflect on how the truth gained from critical inquiry establish oppression and liberation as a part of our individual and social reality.

A multi-paradigmatic perspective

We have reviewed three general paradigms that researchers employ when conceptualizing and carrying out their research. It is important to emphasize again that there is no “correct” paradigm. All paradigms rely on assumptions about the social world that are the subject of philosophical debate. Each paradigm is an incomplete understanding of the world, and it requires a scientific community using all of them to gain a comprehensive view of the social world. This multi-paradigmatic perspective is a unique gift of social work research, as our emphasis on empathy and social change makes us more critical of positivism, the dominant paradigm in social science. We offered the metaphors of expert, empathizer, and activist for each paradigm. It’s important not to take these labels too seriously. For example, some may view that scientists should be experts or that activists are biased and unscientific. Nevertheless, we hope that these metaphors give you a sense of what it feels like to conduct research within each paradigm.

Social work research falls, to some degree, in each of the three paradigms: positivism, interpretivism, and critical.
Researchers should choose whichever paradigm best matches their research question.
No paradigm is more correct than another, and research in all paradigms is necessary to advance social work knowledge.
Describe which paradigm best fits your perspective on the world. Does that fit with how you are thinking about your research project? For example, are you a more critical and radical thinker but have chosen a more “expert” role for yourself in your research project? Describe how the paradigm of your project differs from the paradigm you feel most at home in.

7.3 Theory and research

Differentiate between theories that explain specific parts of the social world versus those that are more broad and sweeping in their conclusions
Identify the theoretical perspectives that are relevant to your project and inform your thinking about it
Identify specific theories relevant to your project

Much like paradigms, theories provide a way of looking at the world and of understanding human interaction. Paradigms are grounded in big assumptions about the world—what is real, how do we create knowledge—whereas theories describe more specific phenomena. A common definition for theory in social work is “a systematic set of interrelated statements intended to explain some aspect of social life” (Rubin & Babbie, 2017, p. 615). [18]

Theories: Big and small

In your Human behavior and the social environment (HBSE) class, you were introduced to the major theoretical perspectives that are commonly used in social work. These are what I like to call big-T ‘T’heories. When you read about systems theory, you are actually reading a synthesis of decades of distinct, overlapping, and conflicting theories that can be broadly classified within systems theory. For example, within systems theory, some approaches focus more on family systems while others focus on environmental systems, though the core concepts remain similar.

Similarly, different theorists define concepts differently, and their theories may explore different relationships. For example, Deci and Ryan’s (1985) [19] self-determination theory discusses motivation and establishes that it is contingent on meeting one’s needs for autonomy, competency, and relatedness. By contrast, ecological self-determination theory, as written by Abery & Stancliffe (1996), [20] argues that self-determination is the amount of control exercised by an individual over aspects of their lives they deem important across the micro, meso, and macro levels. If self-determination were an important concept in your study, you would need to figure out which of the many theories related to self-determination helps you address your working question.

Theories can provide a broad perspective on the key concepts and relationships in the world or more specific and applied concepts and perspectives. Table 7.5 summarizes two commonly used lists of big-T Theoretical perspectives in social work. See if you can locate some of the theories that might inform your project.

Within each area of specialization in social work, there are many other theories that aim to explain more specific types of interactions. For example, within the study of sexual harassment, different theories posit different explanations for why harassment occurs.

One theory, first developed by criminologists, is called routine activities theory. It posits that sexual harassment is most likely to occur when a workplace lacks unified groups and when potentially vulnerable targets and motivated offenders are both present (DeCoster, Estes, & Mueller, 1999). [23]

Other theories of sexual harassment, called relational theories, suggest that one’s existing relationships are the key to understanding why and how workplace sexual harassment occurs and how people will respond when it does occur (Morgan, 1999). [24] Relational theories focus on the power that different social relationships provide (e.g., married people who have supportive partners at home might be more likely than those who lack support at home to report sexual harassment when it occurs).

Finally, feminist theories of sexual harassment take a different stance. These theories posit that the organization of our current gender system, wherein those who are the most masculine have the most power, best explains the occurrence of workplace sexual harassment (MacKinnon, 1979). [25] As you might imagine, which theory a researcher uses to examine the topic of sexual harassment will shape the questions asked about harassment. It will also shape the explanations the researcher provides for why harassment occurs.

For a graduate student beginning their study of a new topic, it may be intimidating to learn that there are so many theories beyond what you’ve learned in your theory classes. What’s worse is that there is no central database of theories on your topic. However, as you review the literature in your area, you will learn more about the theories scientists have created to explain how your topic works in the real world. There are other good sources for theories, in addition to journal articles. Books often contain works of theoretical and philosophical importance that are beyond the scope of an academic journal. Do a search in your university library for books on your topic, and you are likely to find theorists talking about how to make sense of your topic. You don’t necessarily have to agree with the prevailing theories about your topic, but you do need to be aware of them so you can apply theoretical ideas to your project.

Identifying key concepts and relationships

The key to applying theories to your topic is learning the key concepts associated with that theory and the relationships between those concepts, or propositions . Again, your HBSE class should have prepared you with some of the most important concepts from the theoretical perspectives listed in Table 7.5. For example, the conflict perspective sees the world as divided into dominant and oppressed groups who engage in conflict over resources. If you were applying these theoretical ideas to your project, you would need to identify which groups in your project are considered dominant or oppressed groups, and which resources they were struggling over. This is a very general example. Challenge yourself to find small-t theories about your topic that will help you understand it in much greater detail and specificity. If you have chosen a topic that is relevant to your life and future practice, you will be doing valuable work shaping your ideas towards social work practice.

Integrating theory into your project can be easy, or it can take a bit more effort. Some people have a strong and explicit theoretical perspective that they carry with them at all times. For me, you’ll probably see my work drawing from exchange and choice, social constructionist, and critical theory. Maybe you have theoretical perspectives you naturally employ, and if so, that’s a great place to start. But if you aren’t aware of whether you are using a theoretical perspective when you think about your topic, try writing a paragraph explaining what you think about that topic and try matching it with some of the ideas from the broad theoretical perspectives from Table 7.5. This can ground you as you search for more specific theories.

Another way to easily identify the theories associated with your topic is to look at the concepts in your working question. Are these concepts commonly found in any of the theoretical perspectives in Table 7.5? Take a look at the Payne and Hutchinson texts and see if any of those look like the concepts and relationships in your working question or if any of them match with how you think about your topic. Even if they don’t possess the exact same wording, similar theories can help serve as a starting point to finding other theories that can inform your project. Remember, HBSE textbooks will give you not only the broad statements of theories but also sources from specific theorists and sub-theories that might be more applicable to your topic. Skim the references and suggestions for further reading once you find something that applies well.

The final goal is here is the same as it was in Chapter 4: to deepen your understanding of what we already know about your topic. While your literature review will cover mostly empirical information, it should also provide some theoretical perspectives for your topic. Much like paradigm, theory plays a supporting role for the conceptualization of your research project. Making connections between concepts will be supported both by empirical evidence showing that relationship exists, as well as theory telling us why that relationship exists and how it operates in the real world.

Just as empirical evidence is important for conceptualizing a research project, so too are the key concepts and relationships identified by social work theory.
Using theory your theory textbook will provide you with a sense of the broad theoretical perspectives in social work that might be relevant to your project.
Try to find small-t theories that are more specific to your topic area and relevant to your working question.
Identify a theoretical perspective from Hutchison, Payne, or another theory textbook that is relevant to your project. Using the textbook or other key sources, provide a list of at least five important concepts from those theories, what relationships between these concepts the theory establishes, and how you can use this theory to better understand the concepts and variables in your project.

7.4 Theory and paradigm in your project

Apply the assumptions of each paradigm to your project
Summarize what aspects of your project stem from positivist, interpretivist, or critical assumptions

Paradigm and theory have the potential to turn some people off. I’ve often heard students say that they don’t like philosophy and don’t understand where they would fall along research paradigms. This is understandable, since there is a lot of abstract terminology and thinking about rather obvious aspects of daily life. In this section, I’ll use an example from my own research, and I hope it will illustrate a few things. First, it will show that paradigms are really just philosophical statements about things you already understand and think about normally. It will also show that no project neatly sits in one paradigm and that a social work researcher should use whichever paradigm or combination of paradigms suit their question the best.

Thinking as an expert: Positivism

In my undergraduate research methods class, I used an open textbook much like this one and wanted to study whether it improved student learning. You can read a copy of the article we wrote on based on our study . We’ll learn more about the specifics of experiments and evaluation research in Chapter 12, but you know enough to understand what evaluating an intervention might look like. My first thought was to conduct an experiment, which placed me firmly within the positivist or “expert” paradigm.

Experiments focus on isolating the relationship between cause and effect. For my study, this meant studying an open textbook (the cause, or intervention) and final grades (the effect, or outcome). Notice that my position as “expert” lets me assume many things in this process. First, it assumes that I can distill the many dimensions of student learning into one number—the final grade. Second, as the “expert,” I’ve determined what the intervention is: indeed, I created the book I was studying, and applied a theory from experts in the field that explains how and why it should impact student learning.

Theory is part of applying all paradigms, but I’ll discuss its impact within positivism first. Theories grounded in positivism help explain why one thing causes another. More specifically, these theories isolate a causal relationship between two concepts while holding constant the effects of other variables. That is why experimental design is so common in positivist research. The researcher isolates the environment from anything that might impact or bias the cause and effect relationship they want to investigate.

But in order for one thing to lead to change in something else, there must be some logical, rational reason why it would do so. In open education, there are a few hypotheses (though no full-fledged theories) on why students might perform better using open textbooks. The most common is the access hypothesis , which states that students who cannot afford expensive textbooks or wouldn’t buy them anyway can access open textbooks because they are free, which will improve their grades. It’s important to note that I held this theory prior to starting the experiment, as in positivist research you spell out your hypotheses in advance and design an experiment to support or refute that hypothesis.

Notice that the hypothesis here applies not only to the people in my experiment, but to any student in higher education. Positivism seeks generalizable truth, or what is true for everyone. The results of my study should provide evidence that anyone who uses an open textbook would achieve similar outcomes. Of course, there were a number of limitations as it was difficult to tightly control the study. I could not randomly assign students or prevent them from sharing resources with one another, for example.

Thinking like an empathizer: Interpretivism

One of the things that did not sit right with me about the study was the reliance on final grades to signify everything that was going on with students. I added another quantitative measure that measured research knowledge, but this was still too simplistic. I wanted to understand how students used the book and what they thought about it. I could create survey questions that ask about these things, but to get at the subjective truths here, I thought it best to use focus groups in which students would talk to one another with a researcher moderating the discussion and guiding it using predetermined questions. You will learn more about focus groups in Chapter 18.

Researchers spoke with small groups of students during the last class of the semester. They prompted people to talk about aspects of the textbook they liked and didn’t like, compare it to textbooks from other classes, describe how they used it, and so forth. It was this focus on understanding and subjective experience that brought us into the interpretivist paradigm. Alongside other researchers, I created the focus group questions but encouraged researchers who moderated the focus groups to allow the conversation to flow organically.

We originally started out with the assumptions, for which there is support in the literature, that students would be grateful for the lower cost and might have negative attitudes about research. But unlike the hypotheses in positivism, these are merely a place to start and are open to revision throughout the research process. This is because the researchers are not the experts, the participants are! Just like your clients are the experts on their lives, so were the students in my study. Our job as researchers was to create a group in which they would reveal their informed thoughts about the issue, coming to consensus around a few key themes.

When we initially analyzed the focus groups, we uncovered themes that seemed to fit the data. But the overall picture was murky. How were themes related to each other? And how could we distill these themes and relationships into something meaningful? We went back to the data again. We could do this because there isn’t one truth, as in positivism, but multiple truths and multiple ways of interpreting the data. When we looked again, we focused on some of the effects of having a textbook customized to the course. It was that customization process that helped make the language more approachable, engaging, and relevant to social work practice.

Ultimately, our data revealed differences in how students perceived a free textbook versus a free textbook that is customized to the class. When we went to interpret this finding, the remix hypothesis of open textbook was helpful in understanding that relationship. It states that the more faculty incorporate editing and creating into the course, the better student learning will be. Our study helped flesh out that theory by discussing the customization process and how students made sense of a customized resource.

In this way, theoretical analysis operates differently in interpretivist research. While positivist research tests existing theories, interpretivist research creates theories based on the stories of research participants. However, it is difficult to say if this theory was totally emergent in the dataset or if my prior knowledge of the remix hypothesis influenced my thinking about the data. Interpretivist researchers are encouraged to put a box around their prior experiences and beliefs, acknowledging them, but trying to approach the data with fresh eyes. Interpretivists know that this is never perfectly possible, though, as we are always influenced by our previous experiences when interpreting data and conducting scientific research projects.

Thinking like an activist: Critical

Although adding focus groups helped ease my concern about reducing student learning down to just final grades by providing a more rich set of conversations to analyze. However, my role as researcher and “expert” was still an important part of the analysis. As someone who has been out of school for a while, and indeed has taught this course for years, I have lost touch with what it is like to be a student taking research methods for the first time. How could I accurately interpret or understand what students were saying? Perhaps I would overlook things that reflected poorly on my teaching or my book. I brought other faculty researchers on board to help me analyze the data, but this still didn’t feel like enough.

By luck, an undergraduate student approached me about wanting to work together on a research project. I asked her if she would like to collaborate on evaluating the textbook with me. Over the next year, she assisted me with conceptualizing the project, creating research questions, as well as conducting and analyzing the focus groups. Not only would she provide an “insider” perspective on coding the data, steeped in her lived experience as a student, but she would serve as a check on my power through the process.

Including people from the group you are measuring as part of your research team is a common component of critical research. Ultimately, critical theorists would find my study to be inadequate in many ways. I still developed the research question, created the intervention, and wrote up the results for publication, which privileges my voice and role as “expert.” Instead, critical theorists would emphasize the role of students (community members) in identifying research questions, choosing the best intervention to used, and so forth. But collaborating with students as part of a research team did address some of the power imbalances in the research process.

Critical research projects also aim to have an impact on the people and systems involved in research. No students or researchers had profound personal realizations as a result of my study, nor did it lessen the impact of oppressive structures in society. I can claim some small victory that my department switched to using my textbook after the study was complete (changing a system), though this was likely the result of factors other than the study (my advocacy for open textbooks).

Social work research is almost always designed to create change for people or systems. To that end, every social work project is at least somewhat critical. However, the additional steps of conducting research with people rather than on people reveal a depth to the critical paradigm. By bringing students on board the research team, study had student perspectives represented in conceptualization, data collection, and analysis. That said, there was much to critique about this study from a critical perspective. I retained a lot of the power in the research process, and students did not have the ability to determine the research question or purpose of the project. For example, students might likely have said that textbook costs and the quality of their research methods textbook were less important than student debt, racism, or other potential issues experienced by students in my class. Instead of a ground-up research process based in community engagement, my research included some important participation by students on project created and led by faculty.

Multi-paradigmatic framework as a guide to social work thought

I hope this conversation was useful. While I am talking about education research here, the same would apply for social work research of social welfare programs, clinical interventions, or other social work topics. Paradigm and theory are covered first in this part of the textbook on conceptualization because they are logically come first as you think about your project. Each of the research steps that occur after this chapter (e.g., forming a question, choosing a design) rely upon philosophical and theoretical assumptions. As your project develops, you may find yourself shifting between paradigms. That is normal, as conceptualization is not a linear process. As you move through the next steps of conceptualizing and designing a project, you’ll find philosophies and theories that best match how you want to study your topic.

Viewing theoretical and empirical arguments through this lens is one of the true gifts of the social work approach to research. The multi-paradigmatic perspective is a hallmark of social work research and one that helps us contribute something unique on research teams and in practice.

Multi-paradigmatic research is a distinguishing hallmark of social work research. Understanding the limitations and strengths of each paradigm will help you justify your research approach and argue against those who believe one paradigm is better than another.
Paradigmatic assumptions help you understand the “blind spots” in your research project and how to adjust and address these areas. Keep in mind, it is not necessary to address all of your blind spots, as all projects have limitations.
Sketch out which paradigm applies best to your project. Second, building on your answer to the exercise in section 7.3, identify how the theory you chose and the paradigm in which you find yourself are consistent or are in conflict with one another. For example, if you are using systems theory in a positivist framework, you might talk about how they both rely on a deterministic approach to human behavior with a focus on the status-quo and social order.
Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis . Routledge. Guba, E. (ed.) (1990). The paradigm dialog . SAGE. ↵
Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis . Routledge. ↵
Here are links to two HBSE open textbooks, if you are unfamiliar with social work theories. https://uark.pressbooks.pub/hbse1/ and https://uark.pressbooks.pub/humanbehaviorandthesocialenvironment2/ ↵
Lin, C. T. (2016). A critique of epistemic subjectivity. Philosophia, 44 (3), 915-920. ↵
Wills, J. W. (2007). World views, paradigms and the practice of social science research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. ↵
Grogan, K.E. (2019) How the entire scientific community can confront gender bias in the workplace. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 3 , 3–6. doi:10.1038/s41559-018-0747-4 ↵
Tasca, C., Rapetti, M., Carta, M. G., & Fadda, B. (2012). Women and hysteria in the history of mental health. Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health: Clinical practice & epidemiology in mental health , 8 , 110-119. ↵
Klonsky, E. D., Jane, J. S., Turkheimer, E., & Oltmanns, T. F. (2002). Gender role and personality disorders. Journal of personality disorders , 16 (5), 464-476. ↵
Smith, L. T. (2013). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples . Zed Books Ltd. ↵
Routledge. Guba, E. (ed.) (1990). The paradigm dialog . SAGE. ↵
Burrell, G. & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis . Here is a summary of Burrell & Morgan from Babson College, and our classification collapses radical humanism and radical structuralism into the critical paradigm, following Guba and Lincoln's approach. We feel this approach is more parsimonious and easier for students to understand on an introductory level. ↵
Kincheloe, J. L. & Tobin, K. (2009). The much exaggerated death of positivism. Cultural studies of science education , 4, 513-528. ↵
For more about how the meanings of hand gestures vary by region, you might read the following blog entry: Wong, W. (2007). The top 10 hand gestures you’d better get right . Retrieved from: http://www.languagetrainers.co.uk/blog/2007/09/24/top-10-hand-gestures ↵
Rosario, M., Schrimshaw, E. W., Hunter, J., & Levy-Warren, A. (2009). The coming-out process of young lesbian and bisexual women: Are there butch/femme differences in sexual identity development?. Archives of sexual behavior , 38 (1), 34-49. ↵
Calhoun, C., Gerteis, J., Moody, J., Pfaff, S., & Virk, I. (Eds.). (2007). Classical sociological theory (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: Blackwell. ↵
Fraser, N. (1989). Unruly practices: Power, discourse, and gender in contemporary social theory . Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. ↵
Here are links to two HBSE open textbooks, if you are unfamiliar with social work theories and would like more background. https://uark.pressbooks.pub/hbse1/ and https://uark.pressbooks.pub/humanbehaviorandthesocialenvironment2/ ↵
Rubin, A., and Babbie, E. R. (2017). Research methods for social work (9th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth ↵
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of research in personality , 19 (2), 109-134. ↵
Abery, B., & Stancliffe, R. (1996). The ecology of self-determination. in Self-determination across the life span: Independence and choice for people with disabilities ( pp. 111-145.) Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Company ↵
Payne, M. (2014). Modern social work theory . Oxford University Press. ↵
Hutchison, E. D. (2014). Dimensions of human behavior: Person and environment . Sage Publications. ↵
DeCoster, S., Estes, S. B., & Mueller, C. W. (1999). Routine activities and sexual harassment in the workplace. Work and Occupations, 26 , 21–49. ↵
Morgan, P. A. (1999). Risking relationships: Understanding the litigation choices of sexually harassed women. The Law and Society Review, 33 , 201–226. ↵
MacKinnon, C. (1979). Sexual harassment of working women: A case of sex discrimination . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. ↵

a single truth, observed without bias, that is universally applicable

one truth among many, bound within a social and cultural context

quantitative methods examine numerical data to precisely describe and predict elements of the social world

Graduate research methods in social work Copyright © 2020 by Matthew DeCarlo, Cory Cummings, Kate Agnelli is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Search Menu
Advance articles
Author Guidelines
Submission Site
About Social Work Research
National Association of Social Workers
Editorial Board
Advertising and Corporate Services
Journals Career Network
Self-Archiving Policy
Dispatch Dates
Journals on Oxford Academic
Books on Oxford Academic

Editor-in-Chief

Robert L. Hawkins, PhD, MA, MPA

About the journal

Social Work Research publishes exemplary research to advance the development of knowledge and inform social work practice.

Latest articles

Find a home for your paper

Content Collections

Explore these curated collections, which feature articles from all four of the NASW journals.

Politics & Social Justice Collection

Immigration & Social Work Collection

Mental Health Collection

2020 Social Work Month Collection

2019 Social Work Month Collection

Featured Article

Boston College Professor Robert Motley discusses the research he co-authored, "Prevalence and Correlates of Police Contact Anxiety among Male and Female Black Emerging Adults in St. Louis, Missouri."

Read the article

Call for papers

The NASW journals are accepting manuscripts for upcoming special issues.

Discover a more complete picture of how readers engage with research in Social Work Research through Altmetric data. Now available on article pages.

Recommend to your library

Fill out our simple online form to recommend Social Work Research to your library.

Recommend now

Email alerts

Highly Cited Collection

Explore a collection of highly cited articles from the NASW journals published in 2020 and 2021.

Related Titles

Cover image of current issue from Social Work

Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

Online ISSN 1545-6838
Print ISSN 1070-5309
Copyright © 2024 National Association of Social Workers
About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Institutional account management
Rights and permissions
Get help with access
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

The Moscow Social Space: Features and Structure

URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Published: 26 December 2019
Volume 9 , pages 383–395, ( 2019 )

Cite this article

O. I. Vendina 1 ,
A. N. Panin 2 &
V. S. Tikunov 2

271 Accesses

2 Citations

Explore all metrics

The article presents the results of a study on analyzing intracity differences in Moscow. The concept of “social space” as a dual reality is used as the theoretical framework of the work, derived simultaneously from social relations and properties of an urban area. In the study, heterogeneous quantitative indicators were used for each of Moscow’s 125 districts. Sources of information are a census; current socioeconomic, demographic, migration, and electoral statistics; real estate data; surveys of residents in districts of the city. Based on these, the indices of the ethnic mosaic, demographic shifts, development of the urban amenities, people’s moods, and the reputation of place are calculated; districts are categorized by typology, taking into account factors of location and territorial proximity; maps are compiled, reflecting different dimensions of the city’s social space. Comparative analysis showed that the rather egalitarian social space of Soviet Moscow in past years has become more fragmented and polarized: the boundaries of differences have become more marked. The increase in unevenness has led to tangible divisions in improvement of the urban environment, saturation of the urban well-being of some districts, and the impoverishment of others. The authors conclude that, in order to reduce the risks of urban segregation, it is necessary to strengthen the coherence of the urban space and social environments, and to bring the level of diversity of the urban environment in line with that of the population of Moscow districts. Such policies and activity are most required where rapid growth of ethnocultural diversity occurs against a lack of development, relative transport isolation of districts, and social exclusion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

A “space” of one’s own: identity and conflict in two Milan districts

Sonia Stefanizzi & Valeria Verdolini

Redefinition of the Social Space Based on Social Atlas Analysis: A Case Study of Dongguan, China

The emerging spatial organization of the metropolis: zones of diversity and minority enclaves in chicago.

Wenquan Zhang & John R. Logan

Danilova E. Moscow is the right party, Ogonyok, 2008. no. 24, June 17, 2007. Access: https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/ 2299076

Gonzalez E., Ten Differences between Moscow and Moscow, Esquire Weekend, December 27, 2016. Access: https:// esquire.ru/entertainment/14072-moscow10/#part1

The territory of Moscow was considered within the borders before the 2012 expansion as the most urbanized and developed in the same logic since the 1960s.

Bourdieu, P., Sociologie de l’Espace Social , Gallicinium, 2005.

Google Scholar

Varshaver, E.A. and Rocheva, A.L., Communities in cafe as an environment for integration of ethnic migrants in Moscow, Monit. Obshch. Mneniya: Ekon. Sots. Peremeny , 2014, no. 3 (121), pp. 104–114.

Vendina, O.I., Private and public in urban space: from theory to Moscow realities, Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk, Ser. Geogr ., 2009, no. 2, pp. 28–38.

Vendina, O.I. and Aksenov, K.E., Moscow and St. Petersburg: reorganization of urban space as an indicator of change of development model, Probl. Prognoz. , 1999, no. 5, pp. 103–121.

Vendina, O.I., Migranty v Moskve. Grozit li rossiiskoi stolitse etnicheskaya segregatsiya? (Migrants in Moscow: Is Ethnic Segregation Threatening the Russian Capital?), Moscow: Tsentr Migrats. Issled., 2015.

Vendina, O.I., Sotsial’nyi atlas Moskvy (Social Atlas of Moscow), Moscow: Proekt Rossiya, 2012.

Volkov, D., Protest movement in Russia by the eyes of its leaders and activists, Vestn. Obshch. Mneniya , 2012, nos. 3–4 (113), pp. 141–185.

Vysokovskii, A.A., Aleksandr Vysokovskii: sbornik. Tom 2. Practice (Aleksandr Vysokovskii: Collection of Works, Vol. 2: Practice), Moscow: Gray Matter, 2015.

Arkheologiya periferii (Archeology of Periphery), Grigoryan, Yu.E., Ed., Moscow: Mosk. Urban. Forum, 2013.

Gudkov, L.D., Shifted aggression: attitude of Russians to migrants, Vestn. Obshch. Mneniya. Dannye, Analiz, Diskussii , 2005, no. 6, pp. 60–77.

Jacobs, J., The Death and Life of Great American Cities , New York: Random House, 1961.

Zaionchkovskaya, Zh., Poletaev, D., Doronina, K., Mkrtchan, N., and Florinskaya, Yu., Zashchita prav moskvichei v usloviyakh massovoi migratsii (Right Protection of Muscovites in Conditions of Mass Migration), Moscow: Tsentr Migr. Issled., 2014.

Immigranty v Moskve (Immigrants in Moscow), Zaionchkovskaya, Zh.A., Ed., Moscow: Tri Kvadrata, 2009.

Kapkov, S.A., Development of urban public spaces: social and philosophic aspects, Obshch.: Filos., Istor., Kul’t ., 2016, no. 11, pp. 58–63.

Kolosov, V.A., Vendina, O.I., Borodulina, N.A., Seredina, E.V., Fedorov, D.R., and Klimanov, V.V., Creation of new entrepreneurship environment in Moscow: general trends and contradictions, Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk, Ser. Geogr ., 1998, no. 5, pp. 95–109.

Levinson, A.G., Fluid and motionless in the Moscow periphery, in Arkheologiya periferii (Archeology of Periphery), Grigoryan, Yu.E., Ed., Moscow: Mosk. Urban. Forum, 2013, pp. 315–342.

Lefebvre, H., Utopie expérimentale: pour un nouvel urbanisme, Rev. Fr. Sociol ., 1961, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 191–198.

Article Google Scholar

Lefebvre, H., La Production de l’Espace , Paris: Anthropos. Translation and Précis, 1974.

Book Google Scholar

Luhmann, N., The Reality of the Mass Media , Cambridge: Polity Press, 1996.

Malakhov, V.S., Kul’turnye razlichiya i politicheskie granitsy v epokhu global’nykh migratsii (Cultural Differences and Political Frontiers in Epoch of Global Migrations), Moscow: NLO, 2014.

“March of millions” on June 12: social portrait of protest movement (materials of special study of the Russian Public Opinion Research Center), Monit. Obshch. Mneniya: Ekon. Sots. Peremeny , 2012, no. 3 (109), pp. 47–72.

Makhrova, A.G. and Nozdrina, N.N., Differentiation in the housing market in Moscow as reflection of social stratification of the population, Vestn. Mosk. Univ., Ser. 5: Geogr ., 2002, no. 3, pp. 60–68.

Makhrova, A.G. and Tatarintseva, A.A., The development of gentrification processes and reconstruction of Moscow city centre environment in post-Soviet period, Reg. Issled ., 2006, no. 3, pp. 28–42.

Mkrtchyan, N.V., Population dynamics of Russia’s regions and the role of migration: Critical assessment based on the 2002 and 2010 censuses, Reg. Res. Russ ., 2011, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 228–239.

Mkrtchyan, N.V., Migration in Moscow and Moscow oblast: regional and structural features, Reg. Issled ., 2015, no. 3, pp. 107–116.

Novikov, A., Kotov, E., Goncharov, R., Nikogosyan, K., and Gorodnichev, A., Moskva: kurs na politsentrichnost’. Otsenka effektov gradostroitel’nykh proektov na politsentricheskoe razvitie Moskvy (Moscow: Course to Polycenters. Evaluation of the Effects of Urban Planning Projects on Polycentric Development of Moscow), Moscow: Mosk. Urban. Forum, 2016.

Puzanov, K. And Stepantsov, P., Mekhanika Moskvy. Issledovanie gorodskoi sredy (Mechanics of Moscow: Study of Urban Environment), Moscow: Mosk. Inst. Sots.-Kul’t. Progr., 2015.

Rodoman, B.B., Positional principle and pressure of locality, Vestn. Mosk. Univ., Ser. 5: Geogr ., 1979, no. 4, pp. 14–20.

Sokolovskii, S., Identity and identification: expanding the program of anthropological research, in Svoi i chuzhie. Metamorfozy identichnosti na vostoke i zapade Evropy (Friends and Strangers: Identity Metamorphoses in Eastern and Western Europe), Filippova, E.I. and Le Torrivellek, K., Eds., Moscow: Goryachaya Liniya–Telekom, 2018, pp. 28–50.

Tikunov, V.S., Klassifikatsii v geografii (Classifications in Geography), Smolensk: Smolensk. Gos. Univ., 1997.

Ekkel’, B.M., Analysis of mosaic index of national composition of republics, krais, and oblasts of USSR, Sov. Etnogr ., 1976, no. 2, pp. 33–42.

Em, P.P., A big city as an independent central place system, a case study of Moscow, Reg. Res. Russ ., 2018, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 151–157.

Bourdieu, P., Raisons Pratiques: Sur la Théorie de l’Action , Paris: Seuil, 1994.

Dunneier, M., Ghetto: The Invention of a Place, the History of an Idea , New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2016.

Gehl, J., Cities for People , Washington, DC: Island Press, 2010.

Gehl, J., Life between Buildings: Using Public Space , Washington, DC: Island Press, 2011.

Hall, P., Forces shaping urban Europe, Urban Stud ., 1993, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 883–898.

Hall, T. and Hubbard, P., The entrepreneurial city: new urban politics, new urban geographies, Prog. Hum. Geogr ., 1996, vol. 20, pp. 153–174.

Harvey, D., From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: the transformation of urban governance in late capitalism, Geogr. Ann. B , 1989, vol. 71, pp. 3–17.

Harvey, D., The right to the city, Int. J. Urban Reg. Res ., 2003, no. 27, pp. 939–941.

Hurlbert, S., The nonconcept of species diversity: a critique and alternative parameters, Ecology , 1971, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 577–586.

Jost, L., Entropy and diversity, Oikos , 2006, vol. 113, no. 2, pp. 363–375.

Katz, P., The New Urbanism: Toward an Architecture of Community , New York: McGraw Hill, 1994.

Lefebvre, H., Le Droit a la Ville , Paris: Anthropos, 2009, 3rd ed.

Logan, J.R. and Molotch, H.L., Urban Fortunes: The Political Economy of Place , Los Angeles: Univ. of California Press, 1987.

Residential Segregation in Comparative Perspective: Making Sense of Contextual Diversity , Maloutas, Th. and Fujita, K., Eds., London: Routledge, 2016.

Massy, D. and Denton, N., The dimension of social segregation, Soc. Forces , 1988, vol. 67, no. 2, pp. 281–315.

Massy, D., White, M., and Phua, V.-C., The dimension of segregation revisited, Sociol. Methods Res ., 1996, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 172–206.

Mitchell, D., The end of public space? People’s park, definitions of the public, and democracy, Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr ., 1995, vol. 85, no. 1, pp. 108–133.

Molotch, H., The city as growth machine: toward a political economy of place, Am. J. Sociol ., 1976, vol. 82, pp. 309–332.

Vendina, O.I., Muscovites and Newcomers: Strategies for Mutual Adaptation, Reg. Res. Russ ., 2018, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 395–403.

Wacquant, L.J.D., Parias Urbains: Ghetto, Banlieues, État , Paris: La Decouverte, 2006.

Wilkes, R. and Iceland, J., Hyper-segregation in the twenty-first century, Demography , 2004, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 23–36.

Download references

The study was carried out at the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration with the financial support of the Russian Science Foundation (project no. 15-18-00064 “New Approaches and Methods for Regulating Ethno-Political Relations in Russia’s Largest Urban Agglomerations”). Analytical part of the research was fulfilled within the framework of the state-ordered research theme of the Institute of Geography RAS, no. 0148-2019-0008 (“Problems and Prospects of the Russia’s Territorial Development in Terms of its Unevenness and Global Instability”).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences, 119017, Moscow, Russia

O. I. Vendina

Moscow State University, Faculty of Geography, 119991, Moscow, Russia

A. N. Panin & V. S. Tikunov

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to O. I. Vendina , A. N. Panin or V. S. Tikunov .

Ethics declarations

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Vendina, O.I., Panin, A.N. & Tikunov, V.S. The Moscow Social Space: Features and Structure. Reg. Res. Russ. 9 , 383–395 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079970519040117

Download citation

Received : 13 February 2019

Revised : 29 May 2019

Accepted : 11 July 2019

Published : 26 December 2019

Issue Date : October 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079970519040117

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

social space
segregation
spatial models
intergroup interactions
ethnocultural diversity
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

Program Finder
Admissions Services
Course Directory
Academic Calendar
Hybrid Campus
Lecture Series
Convocation
Strategy and Development
Implementation and Impact
Integrity and Oversight
In the School
In the Field
In Baltimore
Resources for Practitioners
Articles & News Releases
In The News
Statements & Announcements
At a Glance
Student Life
Strategic Priorities
Inclusion, Diversity, Anti-Racism, and Equity (IDARE)
What is Public Health?

Strategies for Effective Community Engagement: Critical Service-Learning Seminar

Come join us in a rich community engagement talk with Dr. Tyler Derreth, an assistant professor in the Department of Health, Behavior and Society and an associate Director of SOURCE. Dr. Derreth will share with BSPH community tools and resources on how public health professionals can engage in community by building authentic relationships, learning through service, redistributing power, and promoting social change during their time here at Hopkins and beyond.

Lunch included.

Part of Public Health Week 2024, hosted by the Anna Baetjer Society for Public Health Practice and sponsored by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Student Assembly.

Dr. Tyler Derreth (SOURCE)

Tyler Derreth, PhD is an assistant teaching professor in the Department of Health, Behavior, and Society. He is also the Associate Director of SOURCE, the community engagement and service-learning center at Johns Hopkins. His work concentrates on urban community-university partnerships that work toward social change. He frequently engages in educational practices to advance community goals around various social justice issues. The majority of his work centers on collaboration with Baltimore communities.

Filters and Digital Health Program Reduced Participants' Arsenic Levels by Nearly Half in American Indian Households Relying on Well Water

Two black women dressed in business attire smile at the camera as they stand next to each other.

Student Spotlight: Glendedora Dolce

A Seat at Every Table

A child drinking water from tap with her hands.

Study Estimates Nearly 70 Percent of Children Under Six in Chicago May Be Exposed to Lead-Contaminated Tap Water

Wendy Bennett Empowers Women and Families Through Research

EMCNEI Seminar: Accelerating Social Progress with Dr. Colin Plover

Exploring the question, "how can we accelerate social progress".

Accelerating Social Progress: Using Applied Research, Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Education to Maximize Impact

How can we accelerate social progress? This question guides the work of Dr. Colin Plover of Penn Nursing. Dr. Plover leverages his training and experience in nursing, public health, education, research, and entrepreneurship to inform the development of scalable and sustainable systems that can drive large-scale transformation for social impact. This hybrid seminar will provide insight into Dr. Plover’s work and his broader strategy to accelerate social progress through applied research, innovation, entrepreneurship, and education . Join us Monday, April 1 at noon in Skinner Hall 101 or via Zoom .

Society at large and the healthcare systems specifically fail to universally provide basic services and resources fundamental to maintaining health much less facilitating human flourishing. It is feasible to create systems that not only improve the ability of traditional healthcare systems to meet the basic needs of our society but to reimagine all settings to support healthier populations. The strategies fundamental to achieving this transformation involve applied research, innovation, entrepreneurship, and education. Dr. Plover’s work is focuses on interdisciplinary activities geared towards real-world impact. One example of this work involved a social entrepreneurship venture to create scalable living communities that revolved around community service. Dr. Plover is pursuing big data nursing operations research to optimize the organization of nursing workforces to improve efficiency of care delivery, decrease costs, and improve outcomes for nurses and patients.

Hosted by the Elaine Marieb Center for Nursing and Engineering Innovation .

Skinner Hall

651 N Pleasant St Amherst , MA 01003 United States

Global footer

Site policies
Non-discrimination notice
Accessibility
Terms of use

Health Equity

Scott Jelinek Wins Society for Pediatric Research Award

Associate ldi fellow cited for work with lgbtq+ youth.

Hoag Levins
Share this page on Twitter
Share this page on Facebook
Share this page on LinkedIn

Scott Jelinek, MD, MPH , an LDI Associate Fellow and a Fellow in Adolescent Medicine at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP), has won the 2024 Society for Pediatric Research (SPR) Richard D. Rowe Award for Clinical Research in the wellbeing and care of LGBTQ+ youth and their families.

The SPR is an international professional organization of multidisciplinary clinician scientists. Its Rowe award will be presented at the 2024 Pediatric Academic Societies Annual Meeting in Toronto in May.

Privacy for LGBTQ+ Patients

Jelinek’s honored research focuses on the need for comprehensive data collection and protection of privacy for LGBTQ+ patients.

The study abstract explains that, “Integrating sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) data into electronic health records (EHR) increases opportunities for affirmation but risks repercussions like familial rejection or discrimination.”

The study found that LGBTQ+ adolescents exhibited greater discomfort discussing Adolescent Health Questionnaire results, including SOGI, with caregivers present compared to their peers. Overall, it found that adolescents preferred electronic data collection. It cautioned that healthcare providers should be particularly mindful of privacy concerns for LGBTQ+ adolescents and take steps to ensure confidentiality, especially in light of the 21st Century Cures Act, which may inadvertently disclose sensitive information to their caregivers.

Parental Records Access

The Cures Act includes regulations to facilitate patient, family, and provider access to medical records, significantly increasing the types of electronic health information (EHI) that “must be easily and electronically accessible to patients and guardians.”

A board-certified pediatrician, Jelinek’s overall research investigates ways to leverage health information technology, educational interventions, and clinical innovations to advance the health and wellbeing of LGBTQ+ youth in ways that improve access to high-quality health care.

He provides medical care at CHOP’s Adolescent Medicine Specialty Care Center and at the Gender and Sexuality Development Clinic , as well as primary care at the Karabots Pediatric Care Center in West Philadelphia.

Jelinek received both his MD and MPH from the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, where he was a Human Rights and Social Justice Scholar and completed his pediatric residency training. He was also a Public Policy Fellow with the New York Academy of Medicine and completed a Fellowship in Healthcare Consulting and Leadership with Deloitte Consulting in Washington, D.C.

More LDI News

News | Video

Sindhu Srinivas and Adi Hirshberg Honored by American Heart Association

Receive Edward S. Cooper Award for Heart Safe Motherhood Project

Using an Anti-Racist Approach To Address Patient Social Needs

LDI Researchers Develop A New Framework To Guide Health Systems

Kaday Kamara

Health Care Access & Coverage

Why the U.S. Needs a Creatively Rejuvenated Health Care System

Ezekiel Emanuel’s Presentation at the LDI 2024 Charles C. Leighton, MD, Memorial Lecture

In Their Own Words

Why the Child Tax Credit is Really About Improving Poor Children’s Health, a Pediatrician Says

Better Health Comes With Greater Wealth

George Dalembert, MD, MSHP
and Madeline DeMarco, MPP

Chart of the Day: What’s All This Brouhaha? Today’s Private Equity Purchases of Physician Practices Look Much Like the Past

Penn LDI Study Provides Historical Analysis and Insight for the Future

Miles Meline, MBE

How Are Infant Outcomes for Black Babies Affected by Incarceration Policy?

Study Links Incarceration Policies to Birth Outcomes

Data, AI, & Machine Learning
Managing Technology
Social Responsibility
Workplace, Teams, & Culture
AI & Machine Learning
Diversity & Inclusion
Big ideas Research Projects
Artificial Intelligence and Business Strategy
Responsible AI
Future of the Workforce
Future of Leadership
All Research Projects
AI in Action
Most Popular
The Truth Behind the Nursing Crisis
Work/23: The Big Shift
Coaching for the Future-Forward Leader
Measuring Culture

The spring 2024 issue’s special report looks at how to take advantage of market opportunities in the digital space, and provides advice on building culture and friendships at work; maximizing the benefits of LLMs, corporate venture capital initiatives, and innovation contests; and scaling automation and digital health platform.

Past Issues
Upcoming Events
Video Archive
Me, Myself, and AI
Three Big Points

A Five-Step Guide to Improving Your Employer Brand

Burnish your brand to meet the challenge of talent acquisition by taking some cues from consumer branding.

Talent Management
Marketing Strategy

Carolyn Geason-Beissel/MIT SMR

A consistent priority issue for boards of directors and CEOs is the acquisition and retention of talent. In a 2023 Manpower study of more than 30,000 employers in 41 countries, 75% of employers indicated that they were struggling to acquire the talent they needed. Many companies view the hiring process as the need to search for and find the right person — it is about “acquiring talent,” after all. But talent acquisition involves more than matching the right person to the right role. It also involves positioning your company as the best choice among the employers you are competing against — which highlights the importance of developing an employer brand that candidates believe will fulfill their needs and aspirations better than any other option in the marketplace.

Employer branding, or the perceptions held by internal and external constituents regarding the attractiveness of working for a company, is similar to that of consumer branding — but without the equivalent depth of interest and research. Although companies invest significant resources developing consumer brands, few focus as rigorously or commit the resources required to develop their employer brand, even though attracting talent is a top priority for CEOs. Employer branding requires a more extensive value proposition and communication plan than many traditional, lower-involvement consumer brand efforts. That is why some of the professional services and B2B companies that might not have reputations as strong general marketing firms (such as EY, Deloitte, and Siemens) are rated as having strong employer brands. In other words, organizations that are perceived to have an exceptional consumer brand-building capability are not necessarily perceived as having developed the same level of employer brand-building capability (and vice versa): Excellence on one side does not necessarily translate to excellence on the other.

Get Updates on Innovative Strategy

The latest insights on strategy and execution in the workplace, delivered to your inbox once a month.

Please enter a valid email address

Thank you for signing up

The emphasis in employer branding has been on selling the company — essentially, presenting it in the best possible light. However, this element should be near the end of a multistep process. Importantly, for companies that are used to a “30-second engagement” model of consumer branding, employer branding can be daunting because it requires a candidate journey that may take weeks or potentially months of engagement, and an employee journey lasting many years.

About the Author

Kimberly A. Whitler is the Frank M. Sands Sr. Associate Professor of Business Administration at the University of Virginia’s Darden School of Business, a former chief marketing officer, and the author of Positioning for Advantage: Techniques and Strategies to Grow Brand Value (Columbia Business School Publishing, 2021). Richard Mosley is global vice president of strategy at Universum, the author Employer Brand Management (Wiley, 2014), and coauthor of The Employer Brand (Wiley, 2005) and Employer Branding for Dummies (Wiley, 2017).

Pirogov Medical University

The university.

Recognitions
Eligibility
Fees Structure

Founded in 1906 in the city of Moscow, Pirogov Medical University—officially known as Russian National Research Medical University named after N. I. Pirogov— is one of the oldest medical universities in Russia. The first lecture took place on September 26, 1906, with 206 students, and the first graduation ceremony was celebrated in 1912. The University claims to be the first university in Russia that started offering medical education to women in the Russian Federation.It independently carries out various research projects in medicine and has received the status of National Research University in 2010.The Library of Pirogov Medical University has a collection of more than 7,50,000 books. For world-class clinical training and diverse practical exposure, the University collaborates with more 120 hospitals across the city of Moscow. Pirogov Medical University started accepting international students in 1959. Presently, more than 8,000 students are studying medicine at the University, out of which about 700 are international students. The University has a strong team of about 2,000 faculty members. Pirogov Medical University is approved by the Medical Council of India (MCI) and offers a 6-Year Program for MBBS in Russia. Students in India, who have qualified NEET, can apply for direct admission to the MBBS Program of Pirogov Medical University.

Ministry of Science and Higher Education, Russia

World Directory of Medical Schools (WDOMS)

Medical Council of India (MCI)

Foundation for Advancement of International Medical Education and Research (FAIMER)

To get admission to the MBBS Program of Pirogov Medical University, the student must qualify NEET-UG (National Eligibility cum Entrance Test-Undergraduate).

Besides NEET-UG, there is no requirement to go through any additional entrance examination.

RUS EDUCATION SUPPORT

INDIAN FOOD

MODERN CLASSROOMS

Medical Laboratories

Clinical Training

Recreational Facilities

Ensured Safety

FMGE (Foreign Medical Graduates Examination) Preparation

USMLE (United States Medical Licensing Examination) Preparation

Pirogov Medical University was founded in 1906 in the Moscow city of Russia.
In 1930, Pirogov Medical University organized the World’s first pediatric faculty.
In 1963, Pirogov Medical University organized the World’s first biomedical faculty.
In 2010, Pirogov Medical University received the status of National Research University.
Presently, more than 8,000 students are studying at Pirogov Medical University, out of which about 700 are international students.

University Address

Mbbs program, admission & support, medical licensing examination support, student life.

Focused on constantly improving the quality of education, the University entered the list of Times Higher Education World University Rankings and QS World University Rankings in 2019.

The University claims to be the first university in Russia that started offering medical education to women in the Russian Federation. Among all milestones achieved by the University, two most celebrated achievements are that Pirogov Medical University created the world’s first pediatric faculty in 1930 and the world’s first biomedical faculty in 1963.

To provide students and visitors a glimpse into the decades of the glorious history of the University, Museum of the History of Pirogov Medical University was established in 1981, which continues to capture astonishing achievements of the University, its students, and members.

The University maintains a leading position in Russia by actively participating in activities of medical research and healthcare and delivering excellence in medical education and care.

The University independently carries out various research projects in medicine and has received the status of National Research University in 2010. Conducting pre-clinical as well as clinical studies for a better understanding of human diseases, new medicines, and medical devices have been the center of research at Pirogov Medical University.

To keep the students and healthcare professionals updated on the latest research and innovations in medicine, the University publishes its own scientific journal with articles on biomedical sciences and clinical medicine.

The Library of Pirogov Medical University has a collection of more than 7,50,000 books. Students can also access scientific journals and eBooks through the electronic library system. In collaboration with other universities, academic mobility and exchange programs are also arranged for students to help them get experience in other institutions and build new connections.

For the healthcare of locals, the University operates clinical centers in Moscow. Students are provided hands-on clinical training in these University-operated clinics and also involved in various clinical studies. For world-class training and diverse practical exposure, the University collaborates with more 120 hospitals across the city of Moscow.

Pirogov Medical University started accepting international students in 1959. Until now, the University has trained more than 80,000 doctors. Presently, more than 8,000 students are studying medicine at the University, out of which about 700 are international students. The University has a strong team of about 2,000 faculty members.

Pirogov Medical University is listed in the World Directory of Medical Schools (WDOMS) and certified by the Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (ECFMG), United States of America. Pirogov Medical University is also approved by the Medical Council of Canada (MCC) and the Medical Council of India (MCI). The University offers a 6-Year Program for MBBS in Russia for local as well as international medical aspirants. Students in India, who have qualified NEET, can apply for direct admission to the MBBS Program of Pirogov Medical University.

Pirogov Medical University Faculty of Medicine 1 Ostrovityanov Str Moscow, 117997 Russian Federation

Pirogov Medical University offers a 6-Year MBBS Program in the Russian language. For international students, classes for initial years may be organized in English medium.

The Program for MBBS in Russia is focused on building a strong academic base with a pragmatic approach to education and medical research. To provide hands-on clinical experience, the students studying MBBS in Russia are involved in clinical training from the second year of MBBS. While education in classrooms and laboratories helps the students develop academic skills and sound theoretical understanding, clinical training in University-affiliated hospitals help them apply their knowledge into practice.

To get admission to the MBBS Program of Pirogov Medical University, you can apply online at Rus Education website.

Rus Education is duly authorized by the Russian Centre for Science and Culture (Cultural Department of The Embassy of the Russian Federation in India) to promote Russian Education among Indian Citizens. Rus Education is also an authorized associate of Pirogov Medical University. We facilitate one-window admission to the MBBS Program of Pirogov Medical University with no requirement of any donation or capitation and without any entrance examination.

Pirogov Medical University offers a healthy student life and an opportunity to experience life in Moscow, the capital city of Russia, and also the most vibrant and exciting location in the largest country in the world!

For affordable accommodation of students and make their living experience safe and better, the University maintains a comfortable dormitory. Every room is shared by two or three students, and each floor has a shared kitchen where students can cook their food. Members of the dormitory help the newcomers to settle in their new homes. For the safety of the students, the University’s security team maintains 24-hour surveillance and is capable of providing emergency response, if required.

To help students adjust to life at university, it has a dedicated Student Support System in place. Every group of new students is assigned to two professors who guide the students not only about studying but about living as well, helping students adjust to the new environment and feel comfortable.

To keep students fit and active, Sports Center on the campus is equipped with facilities to play various sports, including badminton, basketball, volleyball, table tennis, swimming, football, hockey, chess, etc. Student can unleash their creativity by indulging in extracurricular adventures offered by Student Organizations and Societies. On the campus, there are ample opportunities for self-improvement and taking part in music, dance, sports competitions, and theater.

For peer support, the University has a Student Council in place which offers support in academic as well as non-academic matters making student life stress free.

For the social upliftment and help students connect with the society and local people, they are involved in community and welfare organized by the University, including medical outreach, health awareness programs, and blood donation camps. The University Volunteer Center organizes a number of volunteer activities to help students contribute to social causes.

Living in Moscow, students can explore its cultural heritage, museums, historic buildings, the world-famous Alexander Garden, and much more. For traveling in Moscow, students don’t face any problems, thanks to its convenient and cheap transportation system, especially the Moscow Metro.

With the charm of Moscow and all the student facilities and support services offered by the University, student life at Pirogov Medical University is a delight.

TOP MEDICAL UNIVERSITIES IN RUSSIA

Perm State Medical University

Tver State Medical University

Orenburg State Medical University

Mari State University

Siberian State Medical University

A php error was encountered.

Severity: Notice

Message: Undefined variable: countries

Filename: includes/footer.php

Line Number: 26

File: /home/mbbsinrussia/public_html/application/views/includes/footer.php Line: 26 Function: _error_handler

File: /home/mbbsinrussia/public_html/application/controllers/University.php Line: 46 Function: view

File: /home/mbbsinrussia/public_html/index.php Line: 315 Function: require_once

Severity: Warning

Message: Invalid argument supplied for foreach()

Message: Undefined variable: state

Line Number: 44

File: /home/mbbsinrussia/public_html/application/views/includes/footer.php Line: 44 Function: _error_handler

IMAGES

Fundamentals of Social Work Research by Engel, Rafael J., Schutt
(PDF) Research for social workers: An introduction to methods
⚡ Social work research questions examples. 100 Social Work Research
Understanding Social Work Research by Hugh McLaughlin (English
Social Work Research and Evaluation
Social Work Research Methods

VIDEO

Principles of social casework
Social Work Research 16 September 2023
SOCIAL SCIENCE VS SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH @DGS EDUPEDIA
Social work research social work important topic pms urdu
socialwork I social work education I msw I bsw social work course
Vlog-3| social work research| @matinavlogs @ravindra_bharti_official @YouTube

COMMENTS

Social Work Research Methods
A variety of social work research methods make that possible. Data-Driven Work. Data is a collection of facts used for reference and analysis. In a field as broad as social work, data comes in many forms. Quantitative vs. Qualitative. As with any research, social work research involves both quantitative and qualitative studies. Quantitative ...
Foundations of Social Work Research
This textbook was created to provide an introduction to research methods for BSW and MSW students, with particular emphasis on research and practice relevant to students at the University of Texas at Arlington. It provides an introduction to social work students to help evaluate research for evidence-based practice and design social work research projects. It can be used with its companion, A ...
How to Bring Research Into Social Work Practice
5.01 (d): Social workers should contribute to the knowledge base of social work and share with colleagues their knowledge related to practice, research, and ethics…. 5.02 (a) Social workers should monitor and evaluate policies, the implementation of programs, and practice interventions. 5.02 (b) Social workers should promote and facilitate ...
Chapter One: Introduction to research
Timely and effective social work interventions further social justice and promote individual change. To do make the right choices, we must have a basis of knowledge, the skills to understand it, and the commitment to growing that knowledge. The source of social work knowledge is social science and this book is about how to understand and apply ...
1.1 How do social workers know what to do?
Social work research occurs on the micro-, meso-, and macro-level. Intuition is a power, though woefully incomplete, guide to action in social work. All human thought is subject to cognitive biases. Scientific inquiry accounts for cognitive biases by applying an organized, logical way of observing and theorizing about the world.
Research for Social Workers
Research for Social Workers has built a strong reputation as an accessible guide to the key research methods and approaches used in the discipline. Ideal for beginners, the book outlines the importance of social work research, its guiding principles and explains how to choose a topic area, develop research questions together with describing the key steps in the research process.
1.4: Social work research
Research for action. Regardless of whether a social worker conducts formal research that results in journal articles or informal research that is used within an agency, all social work research is distinctive in that it is active (Engel & Schutt, 2016).$^{18}$ We want our results to be used to effect social change.
1.4 Understanding research
Because most social workers don't become researchers or practitioner-researchers, students feel like a research methods class is a waste of time. Social workers play an important role in creating new knowledge about social services, as presented in our previous discussion of evidence-based practice and the use of research methods.
The Handbook of Social Work Research Methods
"`Not so much a handbook, but an excellent source of reference' - British Journal of Social Work This volume is the definitive resource for anyone doing research in social work. It details both quantitative and qualitative methods and data collection, as well as suggesting the methods appropriate to particular types of studies.
1.4 Understanding research
Research methods involves a lot of terminology that is entirely new to social workers. Other domains of social work, such as practice, are easier to apply your intuition towards. You understand how to be an empathetic person, and your experiences in life can help guide you through a practice situation or even theoretical or conceptual question.
Scientific Inquiry in Social Work
Chapter 1: Introduction to research. Chapter 2: Beginning a research project. Chapter 3: Reading and evaluating literature. Chapter 4: Conducting a literature review. Chapter 5: Ethics in social work research. Chapter 6: Linking methods with theory. Chapter 7: Design and causality. Chapter 8: Creating and refining a research question.
Social Work Research: Concept, Scope
Concept. Purpose of social work research is to produce new knowledge or to increase already available knowledge in the field of social work. Social work research gives new dimensions to social work techniques and methods and provides new ways to deal with problems. Social work research attempts to highlight insights about what intervention or ...
Social Research Methods for Dummies
Description. This course covers very basic concepts related to research methods. We will talk about research itself, research methods, research strategies, data collection methods, sampling and literature review. My lectures are concise and simplified version of the famous W. L. Neuman book, university lectures (Rachel Wilson and Aek Phakiti ...
PDF what's distinctive abOut sOcial wOrk research?
This is a statement on the commitment of social work to humanitarian values and the promotion of social change. It provides the nucleus from which issue and permeate the six key roles of social work, and any social work endeavour. what's distinctive abOut sOcial wOrk research? 01-Hardwick & Worsley-4042-CH-01.indd 1 15/06/2010 12:59:37 PM
7.3: Social work research paradigms
Social work research falls, to some degree, in each of the four paradigms: positivism, interpretivism, critical, and pragmatist. Adopting a pragmatic, multi-paradigmatic approach to research makes sense for student researchers, as it directs students to use the philosophical assumptions and methodological approaches that best match their ...
7. Theory and paradigm
Here is a short blog post on paradigms in social science that might explain things further. Key Takeaways. Social work research falls, to some degree, in each of the three paradigms: positivism, interpretivism, and critical. Researchers should choose whichever paradigm best matches their research question.
Becoming a Social Worker For Dummies Cheat Sheet
Doctoral programs equip you with the research skills needed to conduct impactful research and contribute to the development of evidence-based social work practices. This level of expertise and leadership helps advance the profession, addresses complex social issues more effectively, and trains the next generation of social work practitioners.
Social Work Research
Explore a collection of highly cited articles from the NASW journals published in 2020 and 2021. Read now. An official journal of the National Association of Social Workers. Publishes exemplary research to advance the development of knowledge and inform social.
PDF School of Social Work Course Outline SOWK 420
3. To critically evaluate research methodologies, data analyses, and interpretation of findings in relation to research questions. 4. To demonstrate the ways in which research can inform social work practice. Required Textbook(s) and Learning Materials Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2020). Social Research Methods (5th Canadian Edition). Don Mills, ON ...
The Moscow Social Space: Features and Structure
The concept of "social space" as a dual reality is used as the theoretical framework of the work, derived simultaneously from social relations and properties of an urban area. In the study, heterogeneous quantitative indicators were used for each of Moscow's 125 districts. Sources of information are a census; current socioeconomic ...
Trump's Truth Social is now a public company. Experts warn its ...
Trump Media & Technology Group, the owner of struggling social media platform Truth Social, began its long-delayed journey as a public company at Tuesday's opening bell under the ticker symbol ...
Moscow
Linked to the research bodies are many design bureaus, including an institute that designs hydroelectric power projects and an institute for the planning of metallurgical plants. One of the more prestigious institutions had been the Russian Academy of Sciences , the Presidium of which is located in a building on Leninsky Prospekt south of Gorky ...
Strategies for Effective Community Engagement: Critical Service
Come join us in a rich community engagement talk with Dr. Tyler Derreth, an assistant professor in the Department of Health, Behavior and Society and an associate Director of SOURCE. Dr. Derreth will share with BSPH community tools and resources on how public health professionals can engage in community by building authentic relationships, learning through service, redistributing power, and ...
About MSUPE
As a basic resource center of psychological service, MSUPE coordinates the work of psychologists in education and social protection, runs over 200 programs of high and further professional education in the relevant fields. MSUPE created a unique branch of scientific, practical, resource centers and laboratories: Center for Neurocognitive ...
EMCNEI Seminar: Accelerating Social Progress with Dr. Colin Plover
How can we accelerate social progress? This question guides the work of Dr. Colin Plover of Penn Nursing. Dr. Plover leverages his training and experience in nursing, public health, education, research, and entrepreneurship to inform the development of scalable and sustainable systems that can drive large-scale transformation for social impact.
Scott Jelinek Wins Society for Pediatric Research Award
Jelinek's honored research focuses on the need for comprehensive data collection and protection of privacy for LGBTQ+ patients. The study abstract explains that, "Integrating sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) data into electronic health records (EHR) increases opportunities for affirmation but risks repercussions like familial ...
A Five-Step Guide to Improving Your Employer Brand
Kimberly A. Whitler is the Frank M. Sands Sr. Associate Professor of Business Administration at the University of Virginia's Darden School of Business, a former chief marketing officer, and the author of Positioning for Advantage: Techniques and Strategies to Grow Brand Value (Columbia Business School Publishing, 2021). Richard Mosley is global vice president of strategy at Universum, the ...
Pirogov Medical University
The University independently carries out various research projects in medicine and has received the status of National Research University in 2010. Conducting pre-clinical as well as clinical studies for a better understanding of human diseases, new medicines, and medical devices have been the center of research at Pirogov Medical University.

Social Work Research Methods That Drive the Practice

Data-Driven Work

Quantitative vs. Qualitative

Quantitative Research

Qualitative Research

Mixed Methods Research

The Importance of Research Design

Research Methods in Social Work

Program Evaluations

Needs Assessments

Randomized Controlled Trials

Descriptive Studies

Single-System Designs

Learn More About Social Work Research Methods

1.1 How do social workers know what to do?

What would you do?

How do social workers know what to do?

Cognitive biases

Scientific Inquiry

Key Takeaways

Image Attributions

Share This Book

No internet connection.

The Handbook of Social Work Research Methods

Subject index

Front Matter

Back Matter

Sign in to access this content

4 1.4 Understanding research

Research is useless!

Research is too hard!

Research is boring!

Get out of your own way

Structure of this textbook

Key Takeaways

Image Attributions

Share This Book

Scientific Inquiry in Social Work

Formats Available

Table of Contents

Ancillary Material

About the Book

About the Contributors

Contribute to this Page

Social Work Research: Concept, Scope

Relevance of Research in Social Work

Limitation of Scientific Research Method in Social Work

Share this:

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

7.3: Social work research paradigms

Learning Objectives

How do scientific ideas change over time?

Paradigm vs. theory

Positivism: Researcher as “expert”

Is positivism right for your project?

Interpretivism: Researcher as “empathizer”

Is interpretivism right for your project?

Critical paradigm: Researcher as “activist”

Is the critical paradigm right for your project?

Pragmatism: Researcher as “strategist”

Adopt a multi-paradigmatic perspective

Key Takeaways

7 7. Theory and paradigm

7.1 Assumptions of social work research

Assumptions about what is real

Assumptions about how we study truth

Assumptions about the researcher’s frame of reference

Assumptions about human action

Assumptions about the social world

Assumptions about the purpose of research

Putting it all together

7.2 Social work research paradigms

Positivism: Researcher as “expert”

Interpretivism: Researcher as “empathizer”

Critical paradigm: Researcher as “activist”

A multi-paradigmatic perspective

7.3 Theory and research

Theories: Big and small

Identifying key concepts and relationships

7.4 Theory and paradigm in your project