Author: Dr

Theoretical Perspectives in the PhD thesis: How Many?

Dr. Terence Love

Abstract

This paper describes why a single theoretical perspective is unlikely to be sufficient for PhD level research in the field of Design. A description of the theoretical perspective from which the research is undertaken, and justification as to why it has been chosen are essential aspects of a PhD thesis. Research in some disciplines, however, involves more than one theoretical perspective. Design Research is one of these disciplines. This paper describes why it is necessary to use several different theoretical perspectives in a single PhD research project in Design. It proposes a way that the descriptions and analyses relating to these different theoretical perspectives might be best integrated into a simple structure for a PhD thesis in the area of Design Research.

Introduction

The PhD thesis is used as the main means of assessing the academic competence of a PhD candidate for the award of Doctor of Philosophy in most disciplines ((Nyquist, 2000; Phillips & Pugh, 1992). The PhD thesis contains a record of the analyses and research processes undertaken by the candidate (Phillips & Pugh, 1992). It is a description of the candidate's work that provides all that is necessary and sufficient for suitably competent researcher to replicate the research, and corroborate the candidate's data, analyses, and conclusions (Phillips & Pugh, 1992; West & Rubinstein, 1986). A substantial aspect of a PhD thesis is a discussion of the background issues that relate to the research problem, and support the conclusions drawn out in the thesis. These background issues have two threads: the material created by others that the candidate has identified as being relevant, and the theoretical standpoint which the PhD candidate uses to undertake the research (Phillips & Pugh, 1992). It is this latter thread that is the focus of this paper.

The researcher's choices of analyses, background material, theories and research techniques is determined by the theoretical position that they adopt (Sharrock & Anderson, 1986; Shipman, 1981). This position consists of all the abstract and theoretical factors that shape the sundry decisions that the researcher makes (Lindsay, 1995). This paper argues that, unlike most research in the natural sciences, it is important for PhD candidates undertaking design research to be aware that in most cases it involves, and depends on, the candidate using multiple theoretical perspectives. For the PhD candidate, this implies that their thesis is unlikely to adequately explain their research and conclusions unless they identify these multiple theoretical perspectives and explain why they were chosen.

The paper consists of three sections:

· Background theory relating to theoretical frameworks and theoretical perspectives.

· The role of theoretical perspectives in design research and theses.

· Suggestions about how these issues can best be included in PhD theses in the area of Design Research.

The final section utilises the five chapter thesis model devised by Perry (Perry, 1994; Perry, 1998) with the modifications of Love (1998; Love, )

Theoretical Perspective

Research projects and their theoretical conclusions are founded on researchers' 'worldviews', human values, theories, and data gathering methods (Flood, 1990; Franz, 1994; Popper, 1976; Reich, 1994). Each research project and its conclusions are defined by a particular combination of these factors that are the theoretical perspectives that define the research (Reich, 1994). The additional practical factors that relate to data gathering combine with the theoretical perspective as the complete theoretical framework for the research (Love, 1998).

Theoretical perspectives are what, consciously or unconsciously, guide each PhD candidate in the development of their research and thesis. When a thesis is written, it is the candidate's exposition of their theoretical perspective(s) that enable readers and examiners to follow their arguments, and reach the same conclusions (Phillips & Pugh, 1992). On a larger scale, the explication of the theoretical perspective that has been used is what enables peer researchers to replicate a candidate's research so as to strengthen confidence in the conclusions that have been drawn (Stegmüller, 1976). Together, these reasons make theoretical perspectives an essential aspect of a PhD candidate's research planning, research, and thesis.

Theoretical perspectives of research contain many factors. These factors can be grouped together in ways that, on one hand, represent the contribution that they make to research, and, on the other hand, to reflect their roles in the structure and dynamics of theory-building. Popper (1976) suggested that these factors have contributions that are best separated into three incommensurate, subjective, theoretical and objective "worlds":

· Subjective - the internal world of human subjective experiences, including thoughts and feelings.

· Theoretical - the world of theories and concepts (independent of their representation in words and formulae because these are a part of the objective world.

· Objective - the external world of objects.

Popper claimed that these three worlds are essentially autonomous, and argued that observations and analyses of one world cannot be used to validate those of other worlds. This latter conclusion is relatively obvious in relation to the subjective and objective worlds, for example, that subjective opinion cannot substitute for objective observation. It is less obvious for the theoretical and objective worlds, where Popper asserts that theory cannot be validated as theory by objective observation. A position that is, however, widely accepted in Philosophy of Knowledge (see, for example, Dewey, 1933; Guba, 1990; Phillips, 1987).

Human activities such as research involve all of Popper's three worlds. Research activities depend on subjective human cognito-affective processes, and the assumptions that underpin researchers' use of theories and data gathering methods and techniques. Together, these issues suggest a seven part model of research that progresses from the subjective world to the objective world via the theoretical world. The theoretical perspective that underpins research consists of the first four elements in the model:

· The ontological perspective(s) - consisting of the assumptions, beliefs and collection of human values that together form the candidate's view of what existence and reality are. In Reich's (1994) terms, this is the candidate's 'world view'.

· The epistemological perspective(s) - define how the candidate's ontological perpective(s) on existence/reality relates to theory for each analysis or theoretical proposal.

· Theories - the theories that lay behind, and are utilised in the candidate's analyses, research practices and conclusions.

· The methodological perspective(s) - provide the assumptions that guide the candidate's choices for research methodologies and the connections to the theoretical background of the research. Methodological perspectives are the interface between the underlying theory, and the research methodology, methods and the techniques that the candidate uses in the objective world.

· Research methodology - guides the candidate's choices for research methods and techniques.

· Research methods - are coherent processes of data gathering and analysis techniques.

· Data-gathering and analysis techniques - are the basic practical elements of research.

The elements of the model, and their relationship to theoretical perspective and Popper's three worlds, are represented below:

Research foundations Perspective Popper's Worlds

Ontological Perspective Theoretical perspective Subjective world

Epistemological Perspective Theoretical perspective Subjective/theoretical worlds

Theories Theoretical perspective Theoretical world

Methodological Perspective Theoretical perspective Theoretical world

Research Methodology Objective world

Research Method Objective world

Research Technique Objective world

The traditional singular theoretical perspective and framework is appropriate to PhD candidates whose research lies wholly within a paradigm for research of the natural sciences (Lindsay, 1995). That is, candidates whose research subjects and analysis objects all lie in a contiguous mathematically-mappable continuum, and do not involve any human or subjective considerations that are excluded from the natural science research paradigm (Crane, 1989). The argument that the natural sciences perspective as logical positivism is the only approach for all research that involves human considerations is now widely discredited (Crane, 1989; Phillips, 1990; Popper, 1976). A heritage of this prior logical positivist era is the relatively widespread assumption that a singular theoretical perspective is sufficient in PhD research. This outlook is evident in guides to PhD research that focus on a single "epistemology", or "research methodology", and has two main weaknesses. First, the theoretical foundations of post-positivist research that involves human values contain more issues than are found in "epistemology" or "research methodology". Second, most PhD-level research involves more than one theoretical perspective, especially for candidates who utilise two or more approaches to data collection to "triangulate" their research.

In design research, PhD candidates are almost always required to address human subjective considerations alongside analyses relating to the properties of designed objects. Each of these research foci require their own theoretical theoretical perspectives. For example, exploring the development of (say) a new communications device may involve issues of; collaboration, individual cognition, socio-cultural forces, technical and economic issues. Each of these may be viewed from several theoretical perspectives, and this requires the candidate to choose the theoretical perspectives that are most appropriate in the context of the research problem that they are tackling. In addition, the PhD candidate may decide to gather data via different methodologies. For example, collaborative designing might be explored by combining quantitative behavioural and informatic data about collaborative activities with qualitative data drawn from semi-structured interviews with participants. This involves three theoretical perspectives: one for each of the data gathering activities, and one for analysis of the combination of the two data streams.

In addition, at all times it is necessary for the PhD candidate to have an over-arching theoretical perspective that shapes and guides their overall approach to addressing the research problem. This overarching perspective sits within an hierarchical relationship with the other theoretical perspectives necessary to address different aspects of the research problem and data gathering:

· Single background theoretical perspective - aimed at research problem

· Multiple theoretical perspectives - needed to address particular aspects of the research problem and the research questions.

· Multiple theoretical perspectives - related to the individual research methods and techniques used to gather data to help answer the research questions.

Regardless of how these multiple theoretical perspectives are arranged, their description and justification form an essential aspect of candidate's analyses, data gathering, and derivation of research conclusions. Without this, a PhD candidate's "thesis" remains without adequate foundations. PhD theses that attempt to "shoe horn" design research into a singular theoretical perspective are unlikely to be satisfactory, and unlikely to make a useful contribution to knowledge, because the inherent compromises increase conceptual and analytical confusion in the field.

Multiple Theoretical Perspectives and Design Research PhD Theses

The description of, and justification for, the multiple theoretical perspectives used in a PhD candidate's research can be included in their thesis in several ways. The following suggestions are based on a modified version of Perry's (1994) five chapter model of thesis, but would equally apply to other more complex thesis structures. The modified version of Perry's thesis model has been chosen to aid brevity but, more importantly, because it offers PhD candidates in design research a fast, straightforward, and well-developed process for creating a successful thesis.

The five chapters of Perry's thesis model are:

· Chapter 1: Introduction. This is an executive summary of the PhD candidate's research describing the research problem, and how particular research questions have been addressed by the candidate to resolve it. Chapter 1 also includes the justification for the research, the definitions of terms and key concepts, and the delimitations of the research.

· Chapter 2: Review of Literature. This chapter is the candidate's review of the existing knowledge and literature that relate to resolving the research problem. It is during this review that the candidate identifies the research questions that form the basis for his or her PhD research project.

· Chapter 3: Theoretical Framework. The third chapter contains the ontological, epistemological, theoretical, and methodological analyses that identify and describe the most appropriate theoretical perspectives for undertaking the research, and addressing the research questions identified in Chapter 2. This chapter also is used to justify and describe the choices of practical research processes that are used by the PhD candidate to gather the new data that enables the research questions to be answered.

· Chapter 4: Results. Chapter 4 lays out the data gathered via the theoretical perspectives and practical research processes defined in chapter 3 in a form easily accessible to the reader. Any analyses presented in Chapter 4 relate only to relationships between data and data gathering processes.

· Chapter 5: Conclusions. In Chapter 5, the research processes is concluded. The research problem is addressed in full through the answers to the research questions of Chapter 2 derived from the data laid out in chapter 4. It is in this chapter that the contributions to knowledge, in the realm of theory, are fully developed and described. This chapter also contains a discussion of the limitations of the candidate's analyses, and suggestions for future research.

The analyses that lead to justifiable decisions about choices of appropriate theoretical perspectives for different aspects of a PhD candidate's research are described in Chapter 3. For clarity, some PhD candidates may choose to graphically map out the structure of relationships between the chosen theoretical perspectives, and different aspects of the research and thesis. This graphical representation of the different aspects of the foundations on which the research project is based is useful because it provides a ready-made structure for writing Chapter 3. It is an approach that aligns well with Perry's recommendation for PhD candidates to include visual representations of the relationships between different aspects of the background knowledge in their literature review of Chapter 2. Many PhD candidates are likely to find that one or more of their research questions relate to theoretical perspectives, and the answers to these research questions naturally emerge (to be reported in Chapter 4) as a result of the analyses undertaken and reported in Chapter 3.

Throughout the thesis runs a single background theoretical framework with its single theoretical perspective that is the position taken by the PhD candidate in addressing the research problem and writing the thesis document. In most cases, the main characteristic of this background theoretical perspective is that of critical analysis, but it may also include a variety of other ontological and epistemological characteristics depending on the research problem being addressed and the candidate's approach.. It is important for the candidate to maintain this background theoretical framework throughout their research and thesis writing, whilst also utilising those other theoretical perspectives necessary for undertaking, or writing about, various data gathering processes and analyses.

In theoretical terms, the above process sounds complex and difficult. In practical terms, however, holding and operating through multiple theoretical perspectives is not difficult - people in all walks of life do it many times a day. The difference for the PhD candidate, is to be conscious of these processes and perspectives, choosing between them appropriately, and using them in the thesis correctly. This is not an unusual expectation. The requirements are an essential and basic skill for anyone working in the realm of philosophy, or involved at a professional level in analysis and theory-making.

References

Crane, J. A. (1989). The problem of valuation in risk-cost-benefit assessment of public policies. In E. F. Byrne & J. C. Pitt (Eds.), Technological Transformation: contextual and conceptual implications (pp. 67-79). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Flood, R. L. (1990). Liberating Systems Theory. New York: Plenum Press.

Franz, J. M. (1994). A critical framework for methodological research in architecture. Design Studies, 15(4), 443-447.

Lindsay, D. (1995). A guide to scientific writing. (2nd ed.). Melbourne: Longman.

Love, T. (1998). Social, environmental and ethical factors in engineering design theory: a post positivist approach. Unpublished unpublished PhD thesis, University of Western Australia, Perth.

Love, T. (2000). Writing a better thesis (Working paper ). Perth: Love Design and Research.

Nyquist, J. (2000). Promising Practices in Doctoral Education, [online]. University of Washington. Available: http://depts.washington.edu/envision/.

Perry, C. (1994, February 1994). Notes for Candidates and their Supervisors (with additions 1996). Paper presented at the ANZ Doctoral Consortium, University of Sydney.

Perry, C. (1998). A structured approach to presenting theses: notes for students and their supervisors. Australasian Marketing Journal, 6(1), 63-86.

Phillips, E. M., & Pugh, D. S. (1992). How to get a PhD: A handbook for students and their supervisors. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Popper, K. (1976). Unended Quest. Illinois: Open Court.

Reich, Y. (1994). Layered models of research methodologies. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering Design and Manufacturing, 8, 263-274.

Sharrock, W., & Anderson, B. (1986). The Ethnomethodologists. Chichester: Ellis Horwood Limited Publishers.

Shipman, M. D. (1981). Limitations of Social Research. (2nd ed.). UK: Longman Group.

Stegmüller, W. (1976). The Structure and Dynamics of Theories. New York: Springer-Verlag.

West, P., & Rubinstein, S. L. (1986). The Commonsense Guide to Writing the Research Paper. New York: MacMillan Publishing Company.

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: a restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. New York: D.C. Heath and Company.