In terms of the particular methods we use in social research, social scientific researchers highlight two broad methodological approaches, quantitative and qualitative, within which research tools such as interviews, questionnaires, documentary analysis, can be located. It is also widely accepted in traditional social science research texts that quantitative and qualitative perspectives are viewed as separate and distinct in terms of their epistemological and ontological considerations (Bryman, 1984, 2001; Onwuegbuzie and Leech, 2005). This refers to what social scientists perceive to be the most suitable stance to be taken in relation to understanding the social world, what is to pass as acceptable knowledge and the ways
in which knowledge is gathered. It is worth highlighting these methodological positions and the particular epistemological and ontological assumptions that underpin them given that the current study employs data collection tools that are associated with both quantitative and qualitative methodological camps; namely, questionnaires and semi-structured interviews.
Quantitative methods are typically depicted as approaches that apply the philosophical assumptions of the natural sciences (Bryman, 2001). Quantitative research follows a theoretical perspective where the purpose is to generate hypotheses that can be tested and it is often characterised as a relatively linear process of steps from theory to conclusion. Quantitative researchers also contend that scientific research can be conducted in a value-free way. This belief in objectivity also applies to quantitative researchers’ claims that social phenomena and their meanings have an existence that is independent of social actors. Quantitative researchers tend to be positivist in their approach to research. They are concerned with precise definitions, objectivity, reliability, replicability, validity and causality. Quantitative researchers are "absolute in the sense that they seek clear-cut criteria by which knowledge may be judged true or false" (Mennell, 1998: 187). When using quantitative research methods, it is suggested that a deductive approach is employed. This refers to the ways in which the researcher uses their knowledge of theory to deduce a hypothesis, which is subsequently tested throughout the research process. In other words, the theoretical perspective is used to guide the research and this theory is then returned to after the empirical research is completed.
In contrast, qualitative methods attempt to see the world from the point of view of social actors and the ways in which they interpret their own social world. Qualitative
researchers are typically thought of as achieving deep, rich, insightful data. Epistemologically, advocates of this approach are interpretivist. They suggest that the subject matter of the social sciences - namely, individuals and their institutions - is fundamentally different from that of the natural sciences and, therefore, research must reflect the distinctiveness of social actors against the natural order (Bryman, 2001). Promoters of this approach are ontologically constructionist and believe that rather than being able to view the social world objectively, social phenomena and their meanings are continually being accomplished by social actors. Typically presented as opposite to quantitative methodology, qualitative researchers predominantly emphasise an inductive method, where theory is the outcome of the research findings. In other words, the observations and findings of research are generalised in order to conceptualise a theory.
Of particular importance for figurationally-informed research is the notion that the methodological framework emerges from the nature of the problem to be investigated and not from the researcher’s predetermined philosophical assumptions. In this regard, it is more likely that the researcher selects the most appropriate tools to address their specific research questions. As Flick (2002) contends, the central criteria for conducting research are:
whether findings are grounded in empirical material and whether the methods have been appropriately selected and applied to the object under study. The relevance of findings and the reflexivity of proceedings are further criteria (p. 5).
A more specific rationale for using questionnaires and semi-structured interviews in the current study will be discussed in more depth at a later stage in this chapter.
From this breakdown, it is clear that a researcher’s alignment with a particular set of philosophical assumptions concerning truth, knowledge and the nature of reality will shape their selection of research methods. Studies that are underpinned by a combination of positivist epistemological and objectivist ontological positions tend to promote the use of research methods traditionally defined as "quantitative", one such method being the questionnaire survey. On the other hand, those studies guided by a combination of constructionist ontological and interpretivist epistemological positions would tend to use those methods that reflect an attempt to uncover meanings, values and interpretations, such as interviewing.
Having discussed "methods" from a philosophical perspective, the aim of the following section is to provide a figurational critique of methods in order to highlight Elias’s own epistemological and ontological allegiances (though he would not have couched them in these philosophical terms). Elias’s approach to methods moves beyond the traditional philosophical perspectives outlined above and provides us with an alternative for how we should understand social research methods. Nevertheless, whilst figurational sociologists have placed great emphasis on explaining the fundamental tenets of figurational sociology, relatively little attention has been given to outlining the processes and practicalities of conducting research from this perspective. In order to grasp Elias’s understanding of methods generally, it is necessary to revisit some of the distinguishing features of figurational sociology. On this basis, the following discussion examines critically: issues in relation to the problems of drawing false dichotomies; the relationship between theory and empirical evidence; the importance of analysing long-term developments and involvement and detachment.