The interpretive approach (social constructivism)

Researchers that use the interpretive approach believe that reality is socially constructed and subjective. Interpretivists seek the need to address human uniqueness within their research. They argue that social reality cannot be simply studied using the same principles applied and employed in the natural sciences (Teague 2000). They use inductive reasoning within their research, and the conclusions they derive suggests truths but do not assure it. They blend abstract concepts and empirical evidences together with the sole aim of creating new concepts and theories. Unlike positivists, they are not necessarily out to test theories; rather, they encourage and enable the creation of new theories. Researchers using the interpretive approach adopt some elements of the constructivist view of social reality, which denotes that social and human life is based more on perceptions, ideas, and beliefs that people hold about reality subjectively, and less on hard factual objective reality (Maxwell 2010). In essence, the interpretivist feel that people socially interact and respond to the lived experiences based on what they believe to be real, rather than simply what is objectively real. This means that social life can only be understood by social scientists, only if they actually study how people construct their own social reality (Yanow 2013).

Researchers that use the interpretive approach largely use inductive reasoning in their research, as well as idiographic method for data collection rather than homothetic method. In idiographic data collection method - which is a qualitative research approach – the use of specific explanations and descriptions of social reality through

72

symbols, images, open-ended questionnaires, interviews, surveys, pictures, etc. are employed which often represents events and people’s actions within social reality (Runyan 1983). The raw data collected usually comprises of idiographic data which are labelled, coded, and categorized, with the aim of identifying patterns, themes, and relationship within the data. The theory develops and the data is collected and analysed, and as the data unfolds. The major drawback with the idiographic data collection method is that it is relatively imprecise, it is context based, and it stands a risk of having multiple meanings since the participants narrate their own experience in relation to the research subject which may not necessarily be the same for all participants. Interpretive researchers are more concerned about the development and creation of a theory which develops and knits together as the research unfolds. Interpretive researches are more qualitative (Elliott & Timulak 2005). They rarely use statistical analysis and the data collected is less standardized.

Interpretivists view social reality as very fluid. They believe nothing repeats itself, and that all moments are unique. They argue that social reality involves testing, constructing, reinforcing, and constantly changing perception shifts which is now embedded in institutions, social as well as cultural traditions. Interpretivists are sceptical of the positivist attempts to produce precise quantitative measures of objective facts driven more by their quest for objectivity (Rowlands 2005). In most cases, replication is not seen as the true test of knowledge by qualitative researchers as the positivists do. This is because positivists think that there is one discoverable reality, which means that when you replicate your study, you will end up with the same findings – constructivists say that replication of the same study across different scientists will likely lead to different findings because of how each ‘constructs’ the study. Constructivists then create knowledge around consensus, i.e. how similar each scientist’s constructions are.

73

In comparison with the four assumptions in the positivist approach, the assumptions for the interpretive perspectives are as listed below.

 Ontological assumption – For interpretivists, there are multiple social realities of attitudes about practices. Reality cannot be easily defined by the researcher alone. It is more important to capture the meanings, experiences, and perceptions of those participants.

 Epistemological assumption – For interpretivists, the study of participants’ experiences can only be captured by hearing what they have to say since they are the ones who lived through this process.

 Axiological assumptions – For interpretivists, the types of questions asked are influenced by the researchers’ worldviews. The analysis of the findings; extrapolation of themes are also influenced by the researchers’ values, personal experiences, and worldviews. At the same time, the values, experiences, and worldviews of the participants interact with those of the researchers to deepen the analysis.

 Methodological assumptions – For interpretivists, using a qualitative design and in- depth, face-to-face interviews, with open-ended questions, allows researchers to obtain deep and rich understandings of what these participants experienced.

Adopting the interpretivist approach in answering the research question would mean focussing on collecting data based only on the research participant’s experience. This approach employs the use of multiple perceptions in a reflexive manner, and focusses more on researching the multiple views of the research participants which constitutes multiples realities. In investigating the relationship between energy infrastructure provision and policy making, it is not enough to collect qualitative data to understand the why of things. It is also very crucial to know the what, and to what extent, of things. Adopting an interpretivist approach in answering the research question means some objective aspects as recorded in historical statistical records on the Nigerian energy

74

infrastructure provisions, and other associated records which answers the “what” and gives a more solid foundation in answering the “why” (which the interpretivist approach focuses on) of such provisions will be lost. As such, the interpretivist approach as a research philosophy is not suitable enough in answering the research question.