This approach can then be argued as one that is full of flaws as persons use their own beliefs to pass judgments, as opposed to making critical evaluations on the policies of the concerned individuals in our case the presidential aspirants (Sandberg 44). Sandberg continues to argue that interpretive approaches are the root causes of faults in the society as they majorly focus on the theoretical assumptions to make final judgments (45). Prainsack attests to the fact that interpretive approaches have led making the wrong conclusions touching on various subjects (404). In the case of legalizing marijuana, it is evident that the same would not have been legalized had the interpretive approach had been implemented. This is because genetic testing on the pros and demerits of marijuana would have already been predetermined in the mind; thus, a misinterpretation of the results achieved. Probably, the recipients of the results on marijuana would have anxiety as they will misinterpret the results, holding the belief that marijuana solely has health risks, not considering the benefits of the drug. This is to mean that the users already have hegemonic ideas on how and why things should be done (Prainsack 404). However, Lin argues that interpretive approach is one that provides valid data as the work is reliable, due to the fact that the researcher applies the causal mechanism to explain occurrences through detailed descriptions of what is observed and linking them with the present (169-170). Positivist approach As opposed to the interpretive approach, the positivist approach as seen in the argument of Kemper is one that focuses on research based on knowledge, information and assumptions made from a positive...
Predicting outcomes and results-interpretive and positivist approach
Predicting outcomes and results-interpretive and positivist approach In the course of making predictions, humans tend to apply various approaches towards the results expected. Others may tend to rely on their feeling towards the subject in question then make an assumption, while others may tend to use facts that explain the outcome in question.
This is to mean that in the case of interpretive approaches to beliefs, individuals do not think of laws and rules and deductive approaches of thinking. In relation to making predictions and the interpretive approach, the approach leads to an analysis of various questions regarding the predictions being made, and provide answers to those questions, on the basis of the predictions made in terms of telling a story. An understanding of the predictions made, is then understood on the grounds of the experiences that human beings have had in the past touching on the issues at hand. For instance in the case of politics, individuals might make predictions in consideration to the existing aspects in the society such as the voting patterns of individuals, the present electoral system, the voting behaviour of the citizens, in our case ‘Obamaism’ amongst others.
The meta-theoretical approach is simply one that gives a background of the research to be done. The positivist approach uses these theories to explain facts as assumed in the assumptions of the theories.