As you learned in The Scientific Method and Sociological Research, sociologists design their research by building on existing scholarship. We use many different frameworks to shape our approaches to research design, data collection, and analysis. In this chapter, we offer a closer look at some common approaches: interpretive frameworks, grounded theory, and critical sociology.

Interpretive Framework

While many sociologists rely on empirical data and the scientific method as a research approach, others operate from an interpretive framework. An interpretive framework, sometimes referred to as an interpretive perspective or approach, is a sociological research approach that seeks in-depth understanding of a topic or subject through observation or interaction. This approach is not based on hypothesis testing. Interpretive frameworks allow researchers to have reflexivity. Reflexivity refers to the ability of the researcher to examine how their social position influences how and what they research (Cambridge 2022). It requires the researcher to evaluate how their feelings, reactions, and motives influence how they think and behave in a situation.

While systematic, this approach doesn’t follow the hypothesis-testing model that seeks to find generalizable results. Instead, an interpretive framework seeks to understand social worlds from the point of view of participants, which leads to in-depth knowledge or understanding of the human experience. Ethnography is one research method that uses an interpretive framework. You will learn more about this method in the next section.

Interpretive research is generally more descriptive or narrative in its findings. Rather than formulating a hypothesis and method for testing it, an interpretive researcher will develop approaches to exploring their topic that may involve a significant amount of direct observation or interaction with subjects, including storytelling. This type of researcher learns through the process and sometimes adjusts the research methods or processes midway to optimize findings as they evolve.

Grounded Theory

Grounded theory uses an interpretive framework to make sense of the social world. Grounded theory is an approach developed by sociologists Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss (1967) at a time when researchers were questioning positivism. As you learned in Chapter 2, positivism refers to Auguste Comte’s theory that science produces universal laws, science controls what is true, and objective methods allow you to pursue that truth. A counter perspective, anti-positivism, offers a different theoretical perspective that suggests social researchers should strive for subjectivity as they work to represent social processes, cultural norms, and societal values.

Grounded theory offers a different approach to analysis that is sometimes used in qualitative research and aims to help with the development of theory (Charmaz 2003). This systematic theory is “grounded in” or based on observations. It uses induction or inductive reasoning, which means you use specific observations or evidence to arrive at broad conclusions. With grounded theory, the research starts by gathering observations before creating categories to organize the data in. After initially organizing the data into categories, they begin to look for patterns and relationships among categories (Glaser and Strauss 1967). A few methods that commonly utilize a grounded theory approach are participant observation, interviewing, and secondary data collection of artifacts and texts.

Critical Sociology

Critical sociology focuses on the deconstruction of existing sociological research and theory. This approach to methods is informed by the work of Karl Marx, and feminist, postmodern, postcolonial, and critical race scholars. Critical sociologists propose that social science is embedded in systems of power. Power is constructed by the set of class, caste, race, gender, and other relationships that exist in society. Consequently, power cannot be treated as purely objective. Critical sociologists view theories, methods, and conclusions as serving one of two purposes: they can either legitimize and rationalize systems of social power and oppression or liberate humans from inequality and restriction on human freedom. We’ll explore examples of this approach in the section “A Closer Look: Indigenous Knowledge and Decolonizing Research Methods” later in this chapter.

Licenses and Attributions for Frameworks Shaping Sociological Research

Open Content, Original

“Frameworks Shaping Sociological Research” by Jennifer Puentes is licensed under CC BY 4.0.

Open Content, Shared Previously

“Interpretive Framework” definition is from “Ch. 2 Key Terms” by Tonja R. Conerly, Kathleen Holmes, Asha Lal Tamang, Introduction to Sociology 3e, OpenStax, which is licensed under CC BY 4.0.

“Anti-positivism” definition is from “Ch. 1 Key Terms” by Heather Griffiths and Nathan Keirns, Introduction to Sociology 3e, OpenStax, which is licensed under CC BY 4.0.

“Critical Sociology” is remixed from “2.1 Approaches to Sociological Research” by Tonja R. Conerly, Kathleen Holmes, Asha Lal Tamang, Introduction to Sociology 3e, OpenStax, which is licensed under CC BY 4.0. Edited for clarity.

All Rights Reserved Content

“Reflexivity” definition is modified from the Cambridge Dictionary and included under fair use.