Paradigmas, enfoques y métodos de investigación: un análisis teórico y metodológico sistemático Paradigms, approaches and research methods: a systematic theoretical and methodological analysis
Barra lateral del artículo
Contenido principal del artículo
Resumen
La investigación científica contemporánea se caracteriza por una diversidad de paradigmas, enfoques y métodos que, si bien enriquecen la comprensión de la realidad, también plantean desafíos en la coherencia metodológica y la elección apropiada para cada objeto de estudio. Este artículo presenta una revisión teórica sistemática y un análisis metodológico profundo de los principales paradigmas (positivista, interpretativo, crítico, pragmatista), enfoques (cuantitativo, cualitativo, mixto) y métodos de investigación (hipotético-deductivo, inductivo, deductivo, emergentes). El objetivo es ofrecer una clarificación conceptual y una guía para la aplicación rigurosa de estas herramientas en la investigación. Mediante una revisión sistemática de literatura, se analizaron artículos científicos publicados en bases de datos de alto impacto como Scopus, Web of Science y SciELO durante los últimos 10-15 años. Los hallazgos revelan tendencias en la adopción de enfoques mixtos y la emergencia de metodologías innovadoras, destacando la necesidad de una comprensión contextualizada y crítica de las opciones metodológicas. Se concluye que la elección del paradigma, enfoque y método debe ser un proceso reflexivo y justificado, alineado con la naturaleza del problema de investigación y los objetivos propuestos, contribuyendo así a la robustez y validez de los estudios científicos.
Descargas
Detalles del artículo
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial 4.0.
Citas
Alvesson, M., & Sköldberg, K. (2009). Reflexive Methodology: New Vistas for Qualitative Research(2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Babbie, E. R. (2016). The Practice of Social Research(14th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods(5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Rand McNally.
Chalmers, A. F. (1999). What Is This Thing Called Science?(3rd ed.). Hackett Publishing Company.
Conte, R., Castelfranchi, C., & Gilbert, N. (Eds.). (1995). Artificial Societies: The Computer Simulation of Social Life. UCL Press.
Cath, C. (2018). Artificial intelligence and the 'good society': The social dimensions of AI ethics.AI & Society, 33(4), 503-518. DOI: 10.1007/s00146-017-0802-5
Copi, I. M., Cohen, C., & McMahon, K. (2016). Introduction to Logic(14th ed.). Pearson.
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing Grounded Theory(2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research(3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications. DOI: 10.1007/s11135-013-9882-y
De Franco, M. F. (2020). Paradigmas, enfoques y métodos de investigación: análisis teórico.Mundo FESC, 10(2), 1-15. Recuperado de https://www.atlantic.edu.ec/ojs/index.php/mundor/article/view/38
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research(5th ed.). Sage Publications.
Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8. DOI: 10.3102/0013189X032001005
Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The Theory of Inquiry. Henry Holt and Company.
Flick, U. (2018). An Introduction to Qualitative Research(6th ed.). Sage Publications
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Sage Publications.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967).The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine.
Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255-274. DOI: 10.3102/01623737011003255
Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed Methods in Social Inquiry. Jossey-Bass.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth Generation Evaluation. Sage Publications.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed., pp. 191-215). Sage Publications
Habermas, J. (1987). The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 2: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Beacon Press.
Hempel, C. G. (1966). Philosophy of Natural Science. Prentice-Hall.
Hine, C. (2015). Ethnography for the Internet: Embedded, Embodied and Everyday. Bloomsbury Academic.
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come.Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26. DOI: 10.3102/0013189X033007014
Kitchin, R. (2014). The Data Revolution: Big Data, Open Data, Smart Cities and Their Dark Sides. Sage Publications.
Kincheloe, J. L., & McLaren, P. (2000). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 279-310). Sage Publications.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford University Press.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage Publications.
Plano Clark, V. L., & Creswell, J. W. (2015).Understanding Research: A Consumer's Guide(2nd ed.). Pearson.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 163-188). Sage Publications.
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews.BMJ, 372, n71. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n71
Popper, K. R. (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Routledge.
Maxcy, S. J. (2003). Pragmatic threads in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 86-99. DOI: 10.1177/1558689803251769
Mertens, D. M. (2010). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods(3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Morgan, D. L. (2014). Pragmatism as a paradigm for mixed methods research.Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 8(2), 104-121. DOI: 10.1177/1558689813504826
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Silverman, D. (2013). Doing Qualitative Research(4th ed.). Sage Publications
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory(2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research(2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of Mixed Methods Research: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Sage Publications.
Trochim, W. M. K., & Donnelly, J. P. (2007). The Research Methods Knowledge Base(3rd ed.). Atomic Dog Publishing.
Wisdom, J. P., & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Mixed methods: Integrating quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis while studying patient-centered medical home models. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Publication No. 13-0027-EF. Rockville, MD.