A study note on the inductive, deductive and the abductive research approaches with reference to research philosophies

A study note on the inductive, deductive and the abductive research approaches with reference to research philosophies (information from perplexity.ai)

My question 1: "What are deductive, inductive and abductive research approaches in social science research all about from the perspectives of (1) positivism, (2) interpretivism, (3) pragmatism and (4) critical realism?"

The reply: "The deductive, inductive, and abductive research approaches in social science research differ fundamentally in how they relate theory and data, and their use varies across philosophical perspectives such as positivism, interpretivism, pragmatism, and critical realism. Here's an overview of these approaches from each perspective:

1. Positivism

• Deductive approach: This is the hallmark of positivist research. Researchers start with existing social theories or hypotheses and then collect data to test these theories. The process moves from the general (theory) to the specific (empirical data). Positivism assumes a single objective reality that can be measured and tested empirically, so deductive methods are used to confirm or falsify hypotheses in a value-free, objective manner.

• Inductive approach: Less common in strict positivism because it starts from specific observations to develop broader generalizations or theories, which is seen as less rigorous. Positivists prefer theory testing over theory building.

• Abductive approach: Not traditionally emphasized in positivism, as it involves iterative hypothesis generation and testing, which may be seen as less definitive. Positivism favors clear, testable hypotheses rather than iterative exploration.

2. Interpretivism

• Inductive approach: Central to interpretivism. Researchers collect rich qualitative data and seek to understand social phenomena by deriving theories from participants' meanings and contexts. It moves from specific observations to broader interpretations, emphasizing subjective understanding and the socio-cultural context.

• Deductive approach: Less favored because it imposes external theories on social phenomena, which interpretivists argue are socially constructed and context-dependent. However, some interpretive studies may use deductive logic cautiously to explore theoretical frameworks.

• Abductive approach: Valuable in interpretivism as it allows researchers to iteratively move between data and theory, generating new insights by reinterpreting data in light of emerging hypotheses. This aligns with the interpretive emphasis on sense-making and evolving understanding.

3. Pragmatism

• Abductive approach: Pragmatism embraces abductive reasoning as a flexible, action-oriented process that cycles between induction, deduction, and abduction. It focuses on solving practical problems and generating useful knowledge through iterative hypothesis testing and refinement. Abductive experimentation is used to address complex social issues by combining qualitative and quantitative methods in a pragmatic, problem-solving manner.

• Deductive and inductive approaches: Both are used pragmatically depending on the research question and context. Pragmatism is less concerned with strict adherence to one logic and more with what works to generate actionable knowledge.

4. Critical Realism

• Deductive approach: Critical realism accepts an objective reality independent of our perceptions but recognizes that this reality is complex and stratified. Deductive approaches are used to test theories about underlying causal mechanisms (generative mechanisms) that produce observed events, but these mechanisms may not always produce regular patterns.

• Inductive approach: Important for exploring and identifying causal mechanisms from empirical data, especially when mechanisms are not directly observable. Induction helps build theory grounded in real social structures and contexts.

• Abductive approach: Critical realism values abductive reasoning for its ability to interpret observed phenomena in light of underlying mechanisms and contexts. Abduction helps bridge empirical observations and theoretical explanations by generating plausible hypotheses about causal powers and liabilities in social systems."=

Summary Table

Approach	Positivism	Interpretivism	Pragmatism	Critical Realism
Deductive	Theory testing from general to specific; objective, empirical validation	Less favored; may impose external theories	Used as needed; pragmatic testing of hypotheses	Testing theories about generative mechanisms; causal explanation
Inductive	Less favored; theory building seen as less rigorous	Central; theory building from data and context	Used as needed; data-driven theory development	Important for discovering causal mechanisms from data
Abductive	Rarely emphasized; less definitive	Valuable for iterative sense-making and theory refinement	Core method; iterative cycling between data and theory to solve problems	Bridges data and theory; explains underlying causal powers

 

In essence, deductive reasoning aligns most closely with positivism, emphasizing hypothesis testing and objective measurement. Inductive reasoning is foundational to interpretivism, focusing on understanding social meanings from data. Abductive reasoning is central to pragmatism and critical realism, enabling iterative theory development and explanation of complex social realities by linking data and theory flexibly and contextually. Each philosophical stance shapes how researchers use these approaches to generate knowledge in social science."

My question 2: "Briefly provide a chronological account of these three research approaches."

The reply: "The chronological development and prominence of deductive, inductive, and abductive research approaches can be traced through the history of scientific thought:

• Deductive Approach The deductive approach, which involves developing hypotheses from existing theories and then testing them with data, has long been a foundational method in science . In quantitative research, the intent is usually to test theories deductively, searching for evidence to support or refute a hypothesis . This approach is characterized by working "top-down," moving from a theory to hypotheses and then to data .

• Inductive Approach The inductive approach focuses on building theories by starting with specific observations, identifying patterns, and then formulating broader generalizations or theories . It works "bottom-up," using participants' views to build themes and generate theory . Historically, Francis Bacon (1561–1626) is associated with advocating an "austere form of inductivism" in his Novum Organum (1620), where he suggested that scientists should begin by collecting data . The early 20th century saw the emergence of qualitative research methods, which are often characterized by an inductive approach, in contrast to the quantitative research that dominated prior to this period .

• Abductive Approach Abductive reasoning involves evaluating scientific theories based on how well they explain available evidence, often starting with "clue-like signs" to form a basic notion for further research . While abductive reasoning has historical roots in implicit scientific practice, as seen in the writings of Francis Bacon, it has become more explicitly recognized as a distinct approach . There has been a notable shift towards abductive reasoning in contemporary fields like futures studies, where it aims to identify structures, connections, contexts, and constraints through cognitive argumentation."

My question 3: "Discuss this topic with reference to dissertation project works of MBA, Housing Studies and Accounting & Finance."

The reply: "In the context of dissertation projects in MBA, Housing Studies, and Accounting & Finance, the choice and application of deductive, inductive, and abductive research approaches reflect the nature of the research questions and disciplinary traditions:

MBA Dissertation Projects

• Deductive approach is commonly used in MBA research, especially when testing existing management theories or business models. For example, an MBA student might start with a theory of leadership effectiveness, formulate hypotheses, and collect quantitative data (surveys, financial metrics) to test these hypotheses. This approach fits well with the positivist tradition prevalent in business research aiming for generalizable, testable results.

• Inductive approach is also used, particularly in qualitative studies exploring new phenomena such as emerging market behaviors or organizational culture. Here, the student collects rich qualitative data (interviews, case studies) and builds theory grounded in the data.

• Abductive approach is increasingly popular in MBA dissertations that combine qualitative and quantitative methods (mixed methods). It allows students to iteratively refine theories by moving between data and existing frameworks to better explain complex business problems.

Housing Studies Dissertation Projects

• Inductive research is often favored in Housing Studies due to the field’s focus on social contexts, lived experiences, and policy impacts. Researchers may explore how residents perceive housing quality or community cohesion, generating new theories from qualitative data.

• Deductive research appears when testing specific hypotheses about housing market trends or policy effects, often using quantitative data like census or survey statistics.

• Abductive reasoning helps explain surprising or complex housing phenomena by combining inductive insights with deductive testing, for example, when unexpected outcomes in housing affordability require revisiting theoretical assumptions.

Accounting & Finance Dissertation Projects

• Deductive approach dominates in Accounting & Finance dissertations, where students typically test financial theories, market hypotheses, or regulatory impacts using quantitative methods and statistical analysis. The research starts with established models and seeks to confirm or refute them with numerical data.

• Inductive approach is less common but used in qualitative explorations, such as understanding ethical decision-making in accounting firms or the impact of organizational culture on financial reporting.

• Abductive approach may be used in mixed methods studies, where initial quantitative findings prompt qualitative investigation to explain anomalies or contextual factors, thus iteratively refining theory.

 

Discipline	Deductive Use	Inductive Use	Abductive Use
MBA	Testing management/ business theories with quantitative data	Building theory from qualitative data on organizational phenomena	Mixed methods to iteratively refine theory and explain complexity
Housing Studies	Testing housing policy or market hypotheses quantitatively	Exploring lived experiences and social contexts qualitatively	Explaining surprising housing outcomes by combining data and theory
Accounting & Finance	Testing financial/accounting theories using quantitative data	Qualitative studies on ethics, culture, or behavior	Mixed methods to explain anomalies or contextual factors

 

In all three fields, dissertation projects often benefit from combining approaches, with abductive reasoning providing flexibility to address complex real-world problems by integrating theory and data iteratively. This is especially useful in dissertations where a single approach may not fully capture the intricacies of the research problem.

My question 4: "What are the intellectual challenges of using all these three research approaches together in a single dissertation project by a student of MBA, Housing Studies or Accounting & Finance?"

The reply: "Using all three research approaches—deductive, inductive, and abductive—in a single dissertation project presents several intellectual challenges for students in MBA, Housing Studies, or Accounting & Finance:

• Complexity and Integration Combining all three approaches requires sophisticated methodological understanding and careful integration. Abductive reasoning, for instance, is often seen as a combination of inductive and deductive strategies, making its application complex in itself . Integrating all three effectively means moving beyond simply applying them sequentially; it demands a more capacious mixing of methods to generate new "surprises" and "hunches" that can alter the knowledge base . This can be particularly challenging for a student writing their first dissertation .

• Theoretical Development vs. Testing Deductive reasoning is primarily for testing existing theories, while inductive reasoning is for building new ones . When all three are used, the student must manage the tension between theory verification (deductive) and theory generation (inductive), while abductive reasoning aims to generate or modify theory by incorporating existing knowledge to build new or refined theories . This requires the student to clearly define when they are building theory versus testing it within different phases of their research.

• Handling "Surprising Facts" and Iteration Abductive reasoning often starts with "surprising facts" or "puzzles" that existing theories cannot explain . Employing abduction alongside deduction and induction means the student must be prepared for an iterative research process, where findings from one approach might lead to new questions or modifications in another . This iterative nature, moving between empirical and theoretical domains, can be cognitively demanding and requires flexibility in research design .

• Methodological Coherence Ensuring that the different approaches are logically connected and contribute to a coherent research narrative is difficult. For example, the collection of quantitative and qualitative data might be combined into a single inductive stage to collectively test deductive propositions that emerged from an abductive theory-building process . This "mixing" is more profound than simply corroborating or triangulating findings . The researcher's role also changes, from being detached and impartial in quantitative (deductive) methods to being more involved and empathetic in qualitative (inductive) methods .

• Practical Feasibility in a Dissertation Context Despite the potential benefits of a combined approach, its practical application can be challenging, especially for a single dissertation project . Managing the scope, time, and resources required to execute research that effectively cycles through all three inferential logics can be overwhelming for a student.

In essence, while combining these approaches can offer a comprehensive understanding and generate novel insights, the intellectual challenges lie in managing the inherent complexities of integration, the dynamic interplay between theory building and testing, handling iterative processes, maintaining methodological coherence, and overcoming the practical constraints of a dissertation project."

A collection of blog notes on using chatgpt for research purpose.