Background: In response to the limitations of logical empiricism, interpretivism emerged as a philosophical approach for developing nursing knowledge. This paper discusses interpretivist constructivism and its value to qualitative nursing research. Methods: The paper synthesizes relevant literature on the importance of interpretivist constructivism in nursing research. It reviews the key elements of interpretivism, the principles of constructivism, the connection between the two approaches, the benefits and limitations of constructivism in nursing research, and the steps for conducting constructivist stroke nursing research. Results: Interpretivist constructivism emphasizes the importance of human experiences, interactions, and social contexts in knowledge development. It allows nurse researchers to adopt flexible, participant-driven approaches to explore and understand complex subjective human phenomena. This approach respects the unique perspectives and contexts of stakeholders, including patients, caregivers, healthcare professionals, and knowledge users. By following specific steps, constructivist researchers can improve the rigor, transparency, and validity of qualitative nursing research while reducing biases in interpreting the inherently subjective experiences of patients. Conclusion: A deeper understanding of the complexities of interpretivism and constructivism in qualitative research is essential. This paper provides a clear, comprehensive guide for effectively applying these approaches in qualitative nursing research.
References
[1]
Pulla, V. and Carter, E. (2018) Employing Interpretivism in Social Work Research. InternationalJournalofSocialWorkandHumanServicesPractice, 6, 9-14. https://doi.org/10.13189/ijrh.2018.060102
[2]
Williamson, K. (2006) Research in Constructivist Frameworks Using Ethnographic Techniques. LibraryTrends, 55, 83-101. https://doi.org/10.1353/lib.2006.0054
[3]
Guba, E.G. and Lincoln, Y.S. (1989) Fourth Generation Evaluation. Sage.
[4]
Schwandt, T.A. (1994) Constructivist Interpretivist Approaches to Human Inquiry. In: Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S., Eds., Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, Inc., 118-137.
[5]
Appleton, J.V. and King, L. (2002) Journeying from the Philosophical Contemplation of Constructivism to the Methodological Pragmatics of Health Services Research. JournalofAdvancedNursing, 40, 641-648. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2002.02424.x
[6]
Von-Glasersfeld, E. (2013) Radical Constructivism. Routledge.
[7]
Nawaz, A. (2012) Social-Constructivism: Futuristic Sphere for eLearning in HEIs. GlobalJournalofManagementandBusinessResearch, 12, 21-28.
[8]
Saleem, A., Kausar, H. and Deeba, F. (2021) Social Constructivism: A New Paradigm in Teaching and Learning Environment. PerennialJournalofHistory, 2, 403-421. https://doi.org/10.52700/pjh.v2i2.86
[9]
Gergen, K.J. (1985) The Social Constructionist Movement in Modern Psychology. American Psychologist, 40, 266-276.
[10]
Stringer, E.T. (1996) Action Research: A Handbook for Practitioners. Macmillation.
[11]
Tanlaka, E.F., Ewashen, C. and King‐Shier, K. (2019) Postpositivist Critical Multiplism: Its Value for Nursing Research. NursingOpen, 6, 740-744. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.306
[12]
Van-der-Walt, J.L. (2020) Interpretivism-Constructivism as a Research Method in the Humanities and Social Sciences: More to It than Meets the Eye. InternationalJournalofPhilosophyandTheology, 8, 59-68.
[13]
Tanlaka, E.F., Agbeyangi, O., Mulcaster, A. and Cruz, E. (2024) Stroke Patients’ Reintegration into Normal Living Post-Discharge from Inpatient Rehabilitation: An Integrative Review. OpenJournalofTherapyandRehabilitation, 12, 274-300. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojtr.2024.123022
[14]
Erlandson, D.A. (1993) Doing Naturalistic Inquiry: A Guide to Methods. Sage.
[15]
Guba, E.G. and Lincoln, Y.S. (1981) Effective Evaluation: Improving the Usefulness of Evaluation Results through Responsive and Naturalistic Approaches. Jossey-Bass.
[16]
Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage.
[17]
Guba, E.G. (1990) The Paradigm Dialog. Sage Publications.
[18]
William, F.K.A. (2024) Interpretivism or Constructivism: Navigating Research Paradigms in Social Science Research. InternationalJournalofResearchPublications, 143, 2708-3578. https://doi.org/10.47119/ijrp1001431220246122
[19]
Scauso, M.S. (2020) Interpretivism: Definitions, Trends, and Emerging Paths. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies.
[20]
Mohammed, S.H. and Kinyo, L. (2020) The Role of Constructivism in the Enhancement of Social Studies Education. JournalofCriticalReviews, 7, 249-256.
[21]
Sharma, M.S. and Bansal, D. (2017) Constructivism as Paradigm for Teaching and Learning. InternationalJournalofPhysicalEducation, SportsandHealth, 4, 209-212.
[22]
Soggiu, A., Eirik Karlsson, B., Gøril Klevan, T. and Ness, O. (2021) Inner and Outer Voices in Research: How Dialogical Approaches Can Enhance Knowledge Development in Mental Healthcare. AustralianandNewZealandJournalofFamilyTherapy, 42, 225-240. https://doi.org/10.1002/anzf.1450
[23]
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (2019) Strategy for Patient-Oriented Re-search. http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/51040.html
[24]
LaSala, C.A. (2009) Moral Accountability and Integrity in Nursing Practice. NursingClinicsofNorthAmerica, 44, 423-434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnur.2009.07.006
[25]
Carey, M. (2012) Qualitative Research Skills for Social Work: Theory and Practice. Ashgate Publishing Limited.
[26]
Morse, J.M. (2015) Critical Analysis of Strategies for Determining Rigor in Qualitative Inquiry. QualitativeHealthResearch, 25, 1212-1222. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315588501
[27]
Appleton, J.V. and King, L. (1997) Constructivism: A Naturalistic Methodology for Nursing Inquiry. AdvancesinNursingScience, 20, 13-22. https://doi.org/10.1097/00012272-199712000-00003
[28]
Ranjbar, H., Joolaee, S., Vedadhir, A., Abbaszadeh, A. and Bernstein, C. (2016) Becoming a Nurse as a Moral Journey: A Constructivist Grounded Theory. NursingEthics, 24, 583-597. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733015620940
[29]
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (2008) Guba and Lincoln’s Evaluative Criteria. http://www.qualres.org/HomeLinc-3684.html
[30]
Tongco, M.D.C. (2007) Purposive Sampling as a Tool for Informant Selection. EthnobotanyResearchandApplications, 5, 147-158. https://doi.org/10.17348/era.5.0.147-158
[31]
Gill, P., Stewart, K., Treasure, E. and Chadwick, B. (2008) Methods of Data Collection in Qualitative Research: Interviews and Focus Groups. BritishDentalJournal, 204, 291-295. https://doi.org/10.1038/bdj.2008.192
[32]
Richards, T.J. and Richards, L. (1994) Using Computers in Qualitative Research. In: Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S., Eds., Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage, 445-462.
[33]
Wood, J.P., Connelly, D.M. and Maly, M.R. (2010) “Getting Back to Real Living”: A Qualitative Study of the Process of Community Reintegration after Stroke. ClinicalRehabilitation, 24, 1045-1056. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215510375901
