Antecedentes de celdas solares utilizando el CuSbS 2

Critical realist research

Initially critical realism, as per Bhaskar (1975, 1979), provided a philosophy rather than a research methodology. As the origins of critical realism were philosophical, the main tenets have provided an overarching framework. Further detail is still necessary in order to apply these principles during the research processes.

Aim of critical realist research

The aim of critical realist research is to consider and explain how social structures and human activity are related (Porter, 2000). Sayer (2000) included the imperative to explain the connections among phenomena in the social world through the study of a stratified reality, in which ‘emergent powers’ and ‘causal mechanisms’ are a contextual focus. Major connections between the phenomena of concern are sought (Sayer, 2000). Critical realists aim to explain phenomena through a detailed exposure of the generative mechanisms that connect contributing factors (Ackroyd & Fleetwood, 2000). At an ontological level reality is considered to be stratified with layers in which phenomena are observable and layers that are unobservable but which generate (or not) the observations that are made (George & Bennett, 2005). A key aim of social science research is to seek the causative mechanisms in order that the invisible factors that generate the empirical world are evident (Danermark et al., 2002). For the researcher this means their aim is to identify generative mechanisms as well as how the generative mechanisms inter-relate to generate events (Lipscomb, 2008).

71 Wynn and Williams (2012) propose a very useful framework for researchers naming five specific assumptions of critical realist research. Firstly, knowledge is mediated through the interplay of transitive and intransitive dimensions, thus the researcher uses current knowledge to frame the observations made, and to identify the generative mechanisms that are present. Secondly, the aim of critical realist research is to explain events rather than predict them. The interactions of the causes of events within an open system are thought to make the events unpredictable. Thirdly, the explanation of events is through the articulation of generative mechanisms, which may or may not generate the event. Fourthly, the generative mechanisms are not measurable or observable, but are still present. Fifthly, multiple possible generative mechanisms will be identified that may generate the event.

EExplanatory research model

Critical realism does not prescribe any particular research method (Sayer, 2000). Danermark et al. (2002) discuss a six phased explanatory research model which they propose as a guide for research. The stages comprise:

1) “Description” (p. 109) of the event or phenomena of interest

2) “Analytic resolution” (p. 109) in which the phenomena are analysed into possible causal components

3) “Abduction/theoretical redescription” (p. 110) of phenomena as they are considered in the context of other theories

4) “Retroduction” (p. 110) in which the data are investigated in order to answer questions related to structures and causal mechanisms

5) “Comparison between different theories and abstractions” (p. 110)

6) “Concretization and contextualization” (p. 110) as the inter-relationships between the structures and the causal mechanisms are examined in their contexts. Concretization refers to studying the mechanisms and structures to consider how they each interact

72 and contextualization is important to consider whether mechanisms and structures are present or if an accidental occurrence has occurred.

Danermark et al (2002) have provided a useful model giving a guide to critical realist case study and this model is described above in order to link the theoretical framework with research design. However the research process utilised in this thesis is articulated by Easton (2010) as he provides more detail of research processes. Easton’s (2010) research process will be described in chapters four and five when the critical realist case study design used in this thesis is discussed.

A

Abduction and retroduction

Abduction and retroduction are highlighted as processes by which events are ‘taken back’ to their generative mechanisms. Abduction and retroduction are used in realist research to move from the layer of the empirical to the layer of the real as causative mechanisms are sought (O'Mahoney & Vincent, 2014). Through abduction the data, such as from participants’ interviews and researcher’s observations, is re-described in more abstract terms to sequence the patterns that created the events by combining current knowledge with the data to provide a viable explanation (O'Mahoney & Vincent, 2014). The data are reinterpreted through the application of theories (Dobson, 2012). Through retroduction as a research strategy, the researcher hypothesises about the structures and mechanisms within the analysed phenomena to identify those that must be present for the phenomena to be as they are (Dobson, 2012). The causal processes that influence the generative mechanisms are retroduced as they contribute to further understandings of the relationships between the generative mechanisms (O'Mahoney & Vincent, 2014). They may be actualised or not, thereby comprising events or not (O'Mahoney & Vincent, 2014). The abduction and retroduction process therefore involves the abstraction of data to form sequenced patterns, which are reinterpreted through theory, and the resulting hypothesised structures and mechanisms within the analysed phenomena are identified as generative mechanisms.

73 The domain of the empirical (such as the researchers’ and participants’ understandings of the phenomena) is theoretically transferred to the unobservable domain of the real (generative mechanisms) (Morais, 2011). Retroduction is thereby a means of uncovering unobservable generative mechanisms in the domain of ‘the real’, that are considered to be generating the events in the domain of ‘the actual’, which may be experienced in the domain of ‘the empirical’ (Reed, 2009). It involves events being explained through proposed theoretical interpretations identifying possible mechanisms that generate the events (Morais, 2011).

The retroductive process for identifying causal mechanisms is one that is “creative and intuitive” (Wynn & Williams, 2012, p. 800) and as the generative mechanisms are not visible they must first be speculated (Bunge, 1997). The researcher generates several explanations of generative mechanisms that “must exist” (p. 800) for the particular events to occur (Wynn & Williams, 2012). Logical explanation of the conditions under which the phenomena occur is provided (Wynn & Williams, 2012). The inference shifts from knowing about the events to knowing the generative mechanisms that led to the event occurring (Scambler, 2001).

Blom and Morén (2011) within the arena of social work discuss the ways in which generative mechanisms can be identified and described, based on the work of Danermark et al. (2002). Key questions are posed within the retroductive phase of the research process, including “How is X possible? What properties must exist for X to be what X is? What causal mechanisms are related to X?” (Blom & Morén, 2011, p. 70). These questions aim to identify the generative mechanisms through the application of retroduction. In their example Blom and Morén retroduce by asking what is needed to improve the life situation of an adolescent in a youth treatment programme. Through retroduction they identify that the adolescent must be ready to respond and exert themselves for change to occur and therefore their “response mechanism” (p. 72) must be activated (Blom & Morén, 2011). There are many elements that combine to activate other elements in order for the ‘response mechanism’ to be activated.

74 O’Mahoney and Vincent (2014) consider that when abduction and retroduction have succeeded new understandings of the phenomena become evident. The subject may be reconceptualised and the processes concerned may also be understood in a different way. The researcher may have abduced and retroduced from data to the theory that best explains the data and created a new way of looking or understanding the phenomena of concern.

SSummary of critical realist research

The main aim of critical realist research is to gain knowledge of the generative mechanisms of phenomena or events that are visible through their effects. The analytic methods of abstraction and retroduction enable the researcher to build knowledge of generative mechanisms through the identification of structures, powers and relations that are present in reality, and are socially mediated by the individuals involved. The three layers of reality include the empirical, the actual and the real, with the search for generative mechanisms lying within the layer of the real.

Evaluating the validity of data and accuracy of analysis

In qualitative research attention is paid to the issue of rigour in the analysis of data to ensure credibility of the interpretation of data and research findings (Green & Thorogood, 2014). Features of rigour in the analysis of data include a transparent account of the procedures used, provision of sufficient evidence from data to support the researcher’s interpretation, comprehensive analysis, and comparison of data between and within cases (Green & Thorogood, 2014). While these issues are relevant to critical realist qualitative research, and may be included in discussion about the rigour of the critical realist research process, they are not the main concepts to be considered.

Maxwell (2012) discusses the need to address issues of understanding, validity and the use of evidence when evaluating the research processes and outcomes of critical realist qualitative research. Understanding and validity relate to accurate description of data (descriptive validity), accurate inferences from data (inferential validity) and accurate theorising of phenomena

75 (theoretical validity). Maxwell (2012) also discusses the need to address the evidence in the research process which concerns the ways in which evidence was gained and the ways in which it was used. The interpretations and conclusions of the study are then able to be scrutinised for credibility.

C

Critical realist research

Critical realism has become increasingly evident in research endeavours. The approach is evident within the ‘business’ sector with proponents within information systems (for example Carlsson, 2004; Dobson, 2012; Wynn & Williams, 2012), organizational research (for example Ackroyd & Fleetwood, 2000; Edwards, O’Mahoney, & Vincent, 2014; Reed, 2009; Sayer, 2004) and industrial marketing (for example Easton, 2010). Some researchers within these disciplines have supported the critical realist’s view of the nature of reality in order to advance knowledge within these areas. The overall rationale for the use of critical realism is the focus on ontology with the identification of generative mechanisms expected to provide useful knowledge for these sectors that has not developed through other research approaches. The identification of generative mechanisms presupposes movement from this analysis to emancipatory action (O'Mahoney & Vincent, 2014). The researcher is able to provide a view of the research problem which may not have been evident to participants, yet this view may also be contested (O'Mahoney & Vincent, 2014).

Critical realist research in health and social sciences

A key attribute of critical realism is the framework through which complex social issues may be understood (Gerrits & Verweij, 2013). Not surprisingly therefore critical realism has also infiltrated health and social research contexts. It is considered one way to grapple with ongoing health and social issues that continue to persist in societies and continue to affect individuals (Jones-Devitt & Smith, 2007). A critical realist approach is evident within social epidemiology (for

76 example Dunn, 2012), social work (for example Blom & Morén, 2011), and health promotion fields (for example Clark, MacIntyre, & Cruickshank, 2007).

C

Critical realist research in nursing

Espoused support

Critical realism has also been utilised within nursing contexts although it is a more recent addition to research endeavours. Lipscomb (2008) supports the use of critical realism in research as critical realism requires the researcher to be explicit about, and ensure congruence of, the underlying epistemology and ontology. Lipscomb (2008) considers that this congruence will support the use of mixed methods for nursing research as it will ensure coherence of the theoretical argument. Similar support is from Angus and Clark (2012) who comment that a particular strength of critical realism is the ability of the researcher to avoid epistemological constraints and to consider concepts in different ways. Methodological diversity is also noted by Clark, MacIntyre, and Cruickshank (2007) along with the usefulness of this approach.

Critical realism is considered to be useful for nursing research, in particular research that aims to explain events in context, understand and improve interventions and also to explore links between bio, psycho and social aspects of health (Clark, Lissel, & Davis, 2008). Nairn (2012) also promotes the application in nursing research as he considers that the stratified ontology of critical realism has the capacity to promote interest in the many facets of nursing practice. McEvoy and Richards (2003) also consider it a useful tool. They support the use of critical realism in nursing to explore how generative mechanisms operate within specific nursing interventions as this approach enables the researcher to look beneath the surface at social and natural phenomena in order to fully understand the effectiveness of the outcomes. Clark, Lissel and Davis (2008) focus on the complexities of nursing practice and nursing interventions as do McEvoy and Richards (2003).

77 A further application of critical realism within nursing has been as a philosophical framework to analyse aspects of nursing. Littlejohn (2003) utilised critical realism as an analytic tool to promote the positioning of nursing in the mental health arena as an autonomous profession that is independent from psychiatry and also from psychology. Bergin, Wells and Owen (2008, 2010) analysed the use of critical realism as a philosophical framework to study mental health and gender. They concluded that it provides a useful approach as it enables the coexistence of current explanations that encompass social, biological, psychological and also cultural components (Bergin et al., 2008). Greater depth and deeper explanation are therefore possible (Bergin et al., 2010).

There is therefore some espoused support for the use of critical realism within nursing. Critical realism promotes congruent epistemological and ontological framing for the research endeavour. The stratification of reality promotes links between the layers enabling complex practice situations to be investigated.

A

Application in nursing research

There are several nursing authors who have utilised critical realism as a mode of research and their research projects will be briefly described next.

Critical realism has been applied by Porter (1993) who used a critical realist ethnographic approach to study the race and power relationships between the medical and nursing staff in an intensive care unit in Ireland. Porter (1993) showed that white Irish nurses’ attitudes and behaviours towards doctors who were from both racial majorities and racial minorities illustrated a complexity inherent within racism related to power and social status. At times racism was expressed while at other times it was not, as mechanisms enabled or constrained the expressions of racism. Porter (2015) has continued to support the application of critical realism, and in particular the application to address some epistemological weaknesses within ethnography (2000).

78 Clark et al. (2007) applied a critical realist approach to evaluate a health promoting programme for primary and secondary prevention, and treatment, of congestive heart disease in Scotland. They concluded that this approach provided a useful way to evaluate a program that addresses multiple determinants of health where the outcomes of the programme often are the result of many underlying mechanisms. They considered that the positivist epidemiological approach did not address the complexities and that a constructivist approach did not provide sufficiently broad evaluations. The ‘middle ground’ of critical realism is therefore able to provide a useful contribution.

In Australia, Masso, McCarthy, and Kitson (2014) have applied a critical realist grounded theory approach to identify the generative mechanisms present, and how they interact, that influence evidence-based practice being implemented in RAC. Four generative mechanisms were identified, whereby individuals needed to: have commonalities in their approach to incorporate change; implement strategies to shift their priorities; have the ability to make connections to incorporate new knowledge into current practices; and have a willingness to act. Each generative mechanism influenced the implementation of evidence, but more than one generative mechanism needed to be present for change to occur in order that evidence was implemented. Critical realism therefore contributed to an explanation of how evidence was, or was not, implemented into RAC.

There is therefore application of critical realism in nursing research prior to the utilisation in this thesis. This methodology has provided an overarching framework for the research processes that have been undertaken. Alignment of the research questions through the ontological and epistemological positioning, with the methods employed to gather, validate and analyse data is evident, and is informed by critical realism.

79