Research methodology is not a neutral toolbox; every method rests on prior assumptions about what social reality is (ontology) and how it can be known (epistemology). The major theoretical strands differ precisely at this level, and understanding them lets you explain why a positivist reaches for a survey while an interpretivist prefers participant observation. This note maps five strands — positivism, interpretivism, critical or Marxist methodology, feminist methodology and postmodern approaches — pairing each with its view of reality and its preferred method.

Positivism

Positivism treats the social world as an external, objective reality governed by law-like regularities, much like nature. Following Comte and Durkheim, it holds that social facts can be observed, measured and correlated without reference to inner meanings. The method is deductive and quantitative — hypothesis testing, statistical survey, the search for causal generalisations and, where possible, prediction. Durkheim's Suicide is the model: rates treated as things, explained by degrees of integration and regulation. Objectivity, replicability and value-freedom are the governing ideals. For the fuller argument see positivism in sociology.

Interpretivism

Interpretive sociology denies that society can be studied like nature, because human action is meaningful. Reality is socially constructed through the meanings actors attach to their conduct. Max Weber's method of Verstehen — interpretive understanding — requires the researcher to grasp the subjective intent behind action, not merely record its external appearance. The characteristic methods are qualitative: ethnography, in-depth interview, participant observation and the case study. The aim is adequacy at the level of meaning rather than statistical correlation, though Weber still sought causal explanation alongside understanding.

Critical and Marxist methodology

Critical methodology, rooted in Karl Marx and developed by the Frankfurt School, rejects the idea that research should merely describe society. Reality is structured by contradiction, exploitation and ideology, and surface appearances often conceal underlying relations of power. Method is therefore dialectical and historical — locating phenomena within the totality and tracing how they change. Crucially, knowledge is tied to emancipation: the point, as Marx put it, is to change the world. The researcher's standpoint is openly partisan toward the oppressed, and critique of ideology is itself a method.

Feminist methodology

Feminist methodology emerged from the charge that mainstream research was androcentric — built on men's experience yet presented as universal. Its ontology stresses that gender structures social life and that women's standpoints yield distinctive, often silenced, knowledge. Standpoint theorists such as Dorothy Smith argue for beginning inquiry from women's everyday lives. Methodologically it favours non-hierarchical, reflexive relationships between researcher and researched, qualitative and biographical techniques, and rejection of the detached, controlling observer. Some feminists retain quantitative tools to document inequality, so the strand is plural rather than monolithic.

Postmodern approaches

Postmodern methodology is sceptical of all grand narratives and of any claim to a single objective truth about the social. Reality is fragmented, plural and constituted through discourse and language. Influenced by Lyotard, Foucault and Derrida, it treats knowledge as bound to power and refuses the notion of a neutral, authoritative researcher. Methods emphasise deconstruction of texts, discourse analysis, attention to multiple voices and reflexive awareness that the account is itself a construction. Its critics argue that thoroughgoing relativism undermines the very possibility of sociology as a discipline.

How to use this in the exam

  • Frame the answer around the ontology–epistemology–method chain: state each strand's view of reality first, then derive its method. Examiners reward this logical spine.
  • Anchor positivism and interpretivism with Durkheim and Weber respectively; contrast social fact with Verstehen in a single crisp line.
  • Use the critical and feminist strands to show that methodology carries values — a natural bridge to any fact, value and objectivity question.
  • Keep a two-line evaluation ready: methodological pluralism and triangulation increasingly combine strands rather than treating them as rivals.
  • A comparative table (reality / aim / method / key thinker) works well as an introduction or conclusion when time is short.