A note on research philosophies: for Housing Studies

A note on research philosophies: for Housing Studies

 

Highlight 4 main ideas on each of the following research philosophies, in the context of Housing Studies dissertation projects:

1.    positivism

2.    interpretivism

3.    pragmatism

4.    critical realism

Also indicate two preferred primary research method designs for each of these 4 research philosophies.

 

For a Housing Studies dissertation, your research philosophy should follow from your research question: whether you seek measurable patterns, residents’ meanings, practical solutions, or the underlying mechanisms producing housing outcomes. The four philosophies differ in assumptions about reality, knowledge, and suitable evidence.

1. Positivism

1.    Objective, external reality: Housing phenomena—such as rent levels, overcrowding, tenure type, or satisfaction—are treated as observable and measurable facts.

2.    Deductive, theory-testing logic: The researcher derives hypotheses from theory, operationalises variables, and tests relationships statistically.

3.    Emphasis on reliability and generalisation: Large samples, standardised instruments, and transparent measurement help produce findings that can be compared across households, estates, or districts.

4.    Causal or associative explanation: The aim is often to identify whether factors such as income, household size, housing quality, or location predict outcomes such as housing satisfaction or mobility.

Preferred primary method designs

·        Cross-sectional household survey: A structured questionnaire administered to residents in public or private housing, analysed using descriptive statistics, correlation, or regression.

·        Quasi-experimental or comparative design: Comparison of housing outcomes before and after a policy intervention, or between estates/tenure groups, using administrative data and statistical testing.

 

2. Interpretivism

1.    Socially constructed reality: “Home,” “neighbourhood,” “security,” and “housing need” are understood through residents’ lived experiences and social meanings.

2.    Inductive, context-sensitive inquiry: Research usually begins with participants’ accounts and develops themes or concepts from the data rather than testing pre-set hypotheses.

3.    Depth over breadth: The priority is rich understanding of why people experience housing in particular ways, rather than producing statistically generalisable estimates.

4.    Researcher reflexivity: Because the researcher interprets participants’ meanings, the dissertation should explain how positionality, interview style, and context may shape the findings.

Preferred primary method designs

·        Semi-structured in-depth interviews: Interviews with tenants, homeowners, frontline housing staff, or policy actors, followed by thematic analysis.

·        Ethnographic case study: Sustained observation in an estate, shelter, regeneration site, or housing office, combined with fieldnotes, informal conversations, and documents.

 

3. Pragmatism

1.    Problem-centred research: The starting point is a practical housing problem—for example, how to improve estate management, tenant participation, or homelessness services—not allegiance to one paradigm.

2.    Methods follow the research question: Quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods are selected according to which evidence best answers the question and supports useful action.

3.    Combination of perspectives: A study may measure the scale of a problem while also exploring residents’ experiences and implementation barriers.

4.    Orientation to practical consequences: Findings should inform recommendations, programme design, policy improvement, or housing-management practice.

Preferred primary method designs

·        Convergent mixed-methods design: A resident survey measuring housing satisfaction or service quality, alongside interviews or focus groups explaining the reasons behind the patterns.

·        Action research / programme evaluation design: Collaboration with a housing organisation to assess an intervention, combining outcome indicators, staff interviews, and resident feedback.

 

4. Critical Realism

1.    Stratified reality: Housing outcomes are shaped by observable events, but also by underlying structures and mechanisms—such as land markets, welfare systems, landlord power, discrimination, and policy regimes—that may not be directly visible.

2.    Fallible, theory-laden knowledge: Researchers can study real housing problems, but their knowledge is provisional and mediated by concepts, data, and context.

3.    Explanation of “what works, for whom, and why”: Critical realism asks not only whether an intervention or condition is associated with an outcome, but which mechanisms generate that outcome under particular circumstances.

4.    Abductive or retroductive reasoning: The researcher moves between observed patterns and possible underlying mechanisms, refining explanations through evidence.

Preferred primary method designs

·        Comparative multiple-case study: Compare several housing estates, cities, or policy settings, using interviews, policy documents, and contextual statistics to identify mechanisms behind different outcomes.

·        Realist evaluation design: Evaluate a housing programme by developing context–mechanism–outcome configurations, using programme data, interviews with stakeholders, and documentary analysis.

Quick orientation

Philosophy	Main dissertation aim		Typical housing question		Main method designs
Philosophy		Main dissertation aim		Typical housing question		Main method designs
Positivism		Measure and test relationships		“What factors predict housing satisfaction?”		Survey; quasi-experiment/comparative statistics
Interpretivism		Understand meanings and experiences		“How do relocated residents define a good home?”		In-depth interviews; ethnographic case study
Pragmatism		Solve a practical problem		“How can tenant participation be improved?”		Mixed methods; action research/evaluation
Critical realism		Explain underlying mechanisms		“Why do similar households have different housing outcomes?”		Comparative case study; realist evaluation

 

 

Positivism is most closely associated with quantitative survey and experimental designs; interpretivism with qualitative interviews and ethnography; pragmatism with mixed-methods and action-oriented designs; and critical realism with mixed or case-based designs that link observed outcomes to underlying causal mechanisms.