This is an outdated version published on 2024-06-02. Read the most recent version.

PENINGKATAN PEMAHAMAN PENELITI MENGENAI ASUMSI FILOSOFIS “POSITIVIST SOCIAL SCIENCE” DALAM PEMILIHAN DESAIN PENELITIAN KUANTITATIF

Authors

  • Muhammad Rasyid Abdillah Universitas Lancang Kuning
  • Rizqa Anita Universitas Lancang Kuning
  • Mutia Fadhilla Universitas Islam Riau

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35446/diklatreview.v8i1.1719

Keywords:

Philosophical assumptions, positivist social science approach, quantitative

Abstract

Understanding the philosophical assumptions in social research, whether “positivist” or “interpretive,” is crucial as these foundations shape the way researchers approach, design, and conduct their studies, impacting every aspect from the selection of research design to the interpretation of findings. This community service activity (PKM) focused on enhancing young researchers' understanding of “positivist social science” (PSS) assumptions in selecting quantitative research designs at PTN XYZ, a public university in Riau Province. Discussions with a faculty leader revealed difficulties in publishing quantitative research in reputable international journals, primarily due to a lack of understanding of these philosophical assumptions. To address this, the PKM team organized online training for 18 researchers, covering key topics such as the philosophical foundations of science, PSS approaches in social science, reasons for the acceptance or rejection of research reports by the scientific community, and the research process in quantitative design. The effectiveness of the training was evaluated using a pretest-posttest approach, with initial findings showing only 5% of participants correctly understood the reasons for using a quantitative design. However, post-training results indicated a significant improvement in participants’ knowledge, ensuring the research contributes meaningfully and relevantly to the field.


Keywords: Philosophical assumptions, positivist social science approach, quantitative

References

Abdillah, M. R., Wu, W., & Anita, R. (2022). Can altruistic leadership prevent knowledge-hiding behaviour? Testing dual mediation mechanisms. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 20(3), 352-366.

Aguinis, H., Hill, N. S., & Bailey, J. R. (2021). Best practices in data collection and preparation: Recommendations for reviewers, editors, and authors. Organizational Research Methods, 24(4), 678-693.

Purnomo, H., Maknunah, J., 2018. Sistem Informasi Pengolahan Data Keuangan Berbasis Web. J I M P - Jurnal Informatika Merdeka Pasuruan 3.

Anita, R., Wu, W., & Abdillah, M. R. (2023). Developing a Scale of Ethical Responsibility (SER): A Multi-Dimensional Instrument for Fintech Professionals. Social Indicators Research, 170(3), 1007-1033.

Creswell, J. W. & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative Inquiry: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publication, Inc.

Daft, R. L. (1995). Publishing in the Organizational Science. London: Sage Publications.

Kuhn, T. (2012). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 4th edition (50th anniversary edition). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Lee, N. & Lings, I. (2008). Doing Business Research: A Guide to Theory and Practice. London, UK: Sage Publications.

Neuman, W. L., (2014). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Boston: Pearson Education Limited.

Neuman, W. L. (2017). Understanding Research. Essex, England: Pearson Education Inc.

Swanson & Holton (2005). Research in Organization: Foundations and Methods of Inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publisher, Inc.

Tharenou, P., Donohue, R., & Cooper, B (2007). Management Research Methods. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Published

2024-06-02

Versions

Issue

Section

Articles