Tercera etapa: Eclosión (1990 2007)

According to Gray (2009) and Crotty (1998) there is an inter relationship between the theoretical stance adopted by the researcher and the methods used. Miles and Hubermann (1994) show that there are three underlying assumptions relevant to research philosophies being:

Ontological assumptions

Epistemological assumptions

Axiological assumptions

Ontology describes “what knowledge and in fact reality is82_{” whilst epistemology} relates to the meaning of knowledge and how it should be acquired and accepted. Axiological assumptions also play a role as they reveal the values researchers place on certain things and therefore their value systems (Miles and Hubermann, 1994). Gray (2009) states further that any philosophy, strategy and method would normally be influenced by both what it means to know and their values.

81 _{Pauls (1988) refers to the author’s work and acknowledges the association of this work with his} especially in terms of the data collection methods.

The author used the research onion (Saunders, 2007) to determine his research philosophy and strategy.

The author is investigating the performance of individuals descending multiple flights of stairs within context. One study of the WTC 9/11 incident (Galea et al, 2008) shows that fatigue may not be an issue in stair descent and yet other health science studies do (Corbeil et al, 2001). Another study by Peacock et al (2009) shows that the distance traversed has the most marked influence on descent speed. Blair (2010) using data from this same study states that the data is extremely “noisy” i.e. there are many other data not being gathered or interrogated. Ayis et al (2007) indirectly supports Peacock et al (2009) in showing that fatigue is a function of reduced walking speed and hence distance. Galea et al (2011) does submit that fatigue may not show up because it is masked by density. There are potential rival theories (Yin, 2009) about what the truth really is in this regard. This is one of the reasons for the author adopting a particular epistemological stance in this instance. He sees that meaning or relationships can be ambiguous or even uncertain. It is therefore necessary to understand the context in which these issues exist or occur (Gray, 2009). There is a need to construct this meaning for it to be “real” (Saunders, 2007 and Gray, 2009).

91

Figure 3- 1: The Research Onion (Saunders et al, 2007)

Figure 3- 1 shows the various layers of Research Methods. The author in adopting an epistemological stance as a constructivist may be seen as a direct conflict of paradigms. This is not the case and in fact the two are compatible and yet distinct (Barkin, 2003). The stance selected is not positivist as the theories do not allow for the study of specific social issues which are critical to this PhD Study (Saunders 2007). Interpretivism is more applicable as a stance as it would allow the author to focus on the social issues. This unique approach however does not permit generalisability between within the context of other cases or research. Constructivism linked with realism (Barkin 2003) is a theory which holds the social phenomena and their meanings are constructed by the people in using them rather than being external objects existing independently of them.

Figure 3- 2: Research Approach: Deductive vs. Inductive – (Source: Spratt et al, 2004)

Peeling away the next layer of the Research Onion (Saunders et al, 2007) requires the approach to be employed in the research study. There are two approaches available being Deductive and Inductive (see Figure 3- 2). Deductive is known as a top-down approach going from the general to the particular. It starts with a theory about the topic of interest (multiple flight stair descent) which is then narrowed down to a more specific hypothesis (individual performance in stair descent) which we can test. This approach most likely involves quantitative methods. The Inductive approach works in the opposite direction as shown in Figure 3- 2 and works from the specific to the general where an empirical observation takes the researcher to a result. It allows for generalisation and is informally known as the bottom-up approach. Qualitative methods are normally associated with this approach (Gray, 2009).

93

The next layer of the onion is the research strategy (Saunders et al, 2007). The author’s position here is strongly influenced by the “inherent” strategy followed in his 1980 trial evacuation studies introduced in Chapter 1. The data collection methods from this study involved the use of interviews, survey and observation. This involves the use of mixed methods (Amaratunga, et al, 2002). As such triangulation between data sets (Hales, 2010) is critical for arriving at a theory that can be generalised. It also reflects a mixture of research approaches (deductive and inductive) and matches the author’s epistemological stance as explained above.

The aim of the PhD Study is;

““To study the performance of mature age office workers descending multiple

flights of stairs in trial evacuations of high rise office buildings in the context of extrinsic and intrinsic factors”.

The PhD Study involves the study of office workers within the context of trial evacuations which means that the identification of contextual issues is extremely important especially as far as generalising theories and/or findings are concerned. Amaratunga et al (2002) recommends a mixed method strategy for studies concerning the Built Environment. The most suitable mixed method or “pluralist” strategy is case study. It is defined as the study of a social unit where the centre of the study is normally a person, group or social institution. The PhD Study aim aligns itself with the case study approach as it studies context in detail (Yin, 2009). The important attribute of case studies is that they can be used for generalisation but only when there is a distinct pattern (Hak and Dul, 2007) set up between outcomes.

The case study method is ideal when asking “how” or “why” question about a set of events over which the researcher has no control. The original trial evacuation studies by Pauls (1974) allowed for some control when examining the

data collection methods83. This was not the case with the author’s 1980 study84 and the PhD Study described in this thesis. The case study is an accepted method within itself and for this method to be successful it has been designed in accordance with one of the authorities on Case Studies (Yin, 2009) as acknowledged by Gray (2009). The design of the case study process for the PhD Study is discussed in the next section. It will be a multiple case study process holistically known as the “PhD Case Study”.

The author’s position in terms of philosophy, approach and strategy is explained in Figure 3-3 where he occupies a central position from epistemology through to data collection methods and where the overall process is designed as a case study that allows for both a top-down and a bottom-up approach which involves the individual as the central unit of analysis. This reflects other studies by Gershon et al (2007) on the WTC 9/11 incident and also the inclusive approach to evacuation planning (Gwynne, 2008).

83 _{In the 1970 NRCC trial evacuation studies observers lead and followed groups of evacuees} down the stairs and therefore may have influenced or even controlled the rate and pattern of descent. In this PhD Study this is not the case so that the author and his observers had no control whatsoever over the evacuation events.

95

Figure 3-3: The Elements of the Research Process used in the PhD Study using Gray’s (2009) “peeling” of the Research Onion (Saunders et al, 2007)