Library and information science and the positivist paradigm: Some critical reflections

IF 1.4 4区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
M. Masuku
{"title":"Library and information science and the positivist paradigm: Some critical reflections","authors":"M. Masuku","doi":"10.1177/09610006231161324","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The employment of the positivist paradigm in Library and Information Science (LIS) research is commonplace, by at least those who have cared to declare their research paradigms, especially at masters and doctoral levels of their studies. Inspired by such widespread use of positivism in LIS, this paper interrogates the applicability and appropriateness of this paradigm as a philosophical bearing for LIS researchers. Although the thrust of the paper is to critique the applicability of positivism to LIS research, it is itself not a lampoon on the scientific nature of LIS, neither is it in the interest of the paper to challenge any researchers who have employed positivism in the conduct of their research in the area of LIS. Instead, it is a critical reflection on some of the glaring challenges of employing positivism in LIS research, and warns against falling into the trap of what the author calls “positivist paradigmatic sophistry.” The paper is not prescriptive or conclusive, but opens new opportunities for critically reflecting on the utility of positivism in LIS research, and a more careful use of this paradigm by LIS scholars and researchers. The discussion unfolds by first putting LIS into perspective by way of briefly tracing the development of the sciences through the lens of Comte. It proceeds by way of explaining the nature of LIS in order to put it into perspective and goes on to unpack the concept of a paradigm before zeroing in on positivism as a paradigm of research. The paper finally presents some challenges that are associated with the application of positivism to LIS research. It argues that positivism is largely incompatible with LIS as a social science and concludes by imploring LIS researchers to engage in a deliberative and progressive discourse on whether positivism is appropriate for LIS research.","PeriodicalId":47004,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Librarianship and Information Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Librarianship and Information Science","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006231161324","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The employment of the positivist paradigm in Library and Information Science (LIS) research is commonplace, by at least those who have cared to declare their research paradigms, especially at masters and doctoral levels of their studies. Inspired by such widespread use of positivism in LIS, this paper interrogates the applicability and appropriateness of this paradigm as a philosophical bearing for LIS researchers. Although the thrust of the paper is to critique the applicability of positivism to LIS research, it is itself not a lampoon on the scientific nature of LIS, neither is it in the interest of the paper to challenge any researchers who have employed positivism in the conduct of their research in the area of LIS. Instead, it is a critical reflection on some of the glaring challenges of employing positivism in LIS research, and warns against falling into the trap of what the author calls “positivist paradigmatic sophistry.” The paper is not prescriptive or conclusive, but opens new opportunities for critically reflecting on the utility of positivism in LIS research, and a more careful use of this paradigm by LIS scholars and researchers. The discussion unfolds by first putting LIS into perspective by way of briefly tracing the development of the sciences through the lens of Comte. It proceeds by way of explaining the nature of LIS in order to put it into perspective and goes on to unpack the concept of a paradigm before zeroing in on positivism as a paradigm of research. The paper finally presents some challenges that are associated with the application of positivism to LIS research. It argues that positivism is largely incompatible with LIS as a social science and concludes by imploring LIS researchers to engage in a deliberative and progressive discourse on whether positivism is appropriate for LIS research.
图书情报学与实证主义范式:几点批判性思考
实证主义范式在图书馆和信息科学(LIS)研究中的应用是司空见惯的,至少对于那些愿意宣布自己的研究范式的人来说,尤其是在硕士和博士研究阶段。受实证主义在LIS中广泛应用的启发,本文质疑这种范式作为LIS研究者的哲学意义的适用性和适当性。尽管本文的主旨是批判实证主义在LIS研究中的适用性,但它本身并不是对LIS科学性质的讽刺,挑战任何在LIS领域使用实证主义进行研究的研究人员也不符合论文的利益。相反,它是对在LIS研究中使用实证主义的一些突出挑战的批判性反思,并警告不要落入作者所说的“实证主义范式诡辩”的陷阱。这篇论文不是规定性的或结论性的,但为批判性反思实证主义在LIS研究中的效用开辟了新的机会,以及LIS学者和研究人员对这一范式的更谨慎使用。讨论首先通过Comte的镜头简要追踪科学的发展,将LIS放在一个正确的角度来展开。它通过解释LIS的性质来看待它,并在将实证主义作为一种研究范式之前,对范式的概念进行了解读。最后,本文提出了实证主义在LIS研究中的应用所面临的一些挑战。它认为实证主义在很大程度上与LIS作为一门社会科学是不相容的,并恳求LIS研究人员就实证主义是否适合LIS研究进行深思熟虑和进步的讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Librarianship and Information Science
Journal of Librarianship and Information Science INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
11.80%
发文量
82
期刊介绍: Journal of Librarianship and Information Science is the peer-reviewed international quarterly journal for librarians, information scientists, specialists, managers and educators interested in keeping up to date with the most recent issues and developments in the field. The Journal provides a forumfor the publication of research and practical developments as well as for discussion papers and viewpoints on topical concerns in a profession facing many challenges.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信