S.TRUEMAN PhD THESIS 2016

112

stance regarding the nature of reality; they argue for the existence of a single, static, divisible and fragmentable reality. This enables a phenomenon to be removed from its natural contextual or social setting and be legitimately studied in a controlled environment. Conversely, interpretivists assert that reality is intersubjectively constructed based on meanings and understandings on social and experiential levels (Bryman, 2001), and consists of multiple realities reflective of different individual and group perceptions, as opposed to one independent and objective reality. Context situates each behaviour or event and influences the meaning of the phenomenon; thus, reality is socially constructed, subjectively interpreted, and cannot be separated from its natural setting or studied in isolation. The goal of an interpretivist researcher is to understand and interpret human behaviour rather than to generalise and predict causes and effects. Thus, motives, meanings, reasons and other subjective experiences are situated in time and context, and can only be understood as such (Hudson & Ozanne, 1988). 4.2.5 Methodology The word ‘methodology’ derives from the Greek word methodologia . Methodology refers to the processes and procedures adopted in undertaking the research, and is situated within the researcher’s stance concerning ontology, epistemology and axiology. Crotty (1998) stated that methodology is the ‘strategy, plan of action, process or design’ (p. 3) underlying the choice and use of particular research methods. Table 4.1 summarises the contrasts between the positivist and interpretivist lenses of enquiry across the domains of epistemology, axiology, rhetoric, ontology and methodology.