Read on Twitter
A little thread hypothesising why some of the beliefs about science can be polarising in the misinformation world (with some sneaky underpinnings of research paradigms).
#MedTwitter #MedEd #NurseTwitter #FOANed #FOAMed
#MedTwitter #MedEd #NurseTwitter #FOANed #FOAMed
Some of the challenges around misinformation and the conflict surrounding responding to hot topics is all about world views. In research world we call this paradigms.
What this means is that there is a set of agreements about how a problem is be viewed - a set of assumptions and beliefs. The nuance here is that this worldview CHANGES the interpretation and/or weight of the problem or data.
Today I thought I’d open up a conversation proposing why I think we might have so much conflict about this kind of stuff. So read on and tell me your thoughts!
There are four main worldviews that I consider in my research. (See slide)
Positivism
Post-positivism
Constructivism
Critical Theory
I would class myself has being mostly Post-Positivist and Constructivist in my approach to science.
Positivism
Post-positivism
Constructivism
Critical Theory
I would class myself has being mostly Post-Positivist and Constructivist in my approach to science.
Let’s use a really simplified example to apply each of these world views - the ocean’s colour.
Exploring red through a positivist lens, I would rely on data such as spectrometers to determine the colour of the ocean, producing a clear definition, often using a single measure. The result is absolute. My statement would be “the ocean is blue”.
If I take a post-positivist lens, I might consider a similar approach, and perhaps may utilise a few different methods. But the result is not absolute - “to the best of our knowledge, the ocean is blue”
In a constructivist approach,I rely on broader elements -in what setting was the ocean blue? I might consider the perspective of others- how do you interpret the colour? My statement might be “the ocean’s colour is different to different people, in different locations &settings”
In critical theory, it explores these concepts deeper- considering the potential of other structures that might influence the knowledge that one has about the ocean, the history that has shaped that colour perception &much more.
“the ocean’s colour is different to different people, in different locations & settings AND depends on their knowledge or interpretation of colour”
Knowing this, I think about some of the conflicts around health information - I wonder if this is where some of it stems. If one perceives a topic like health science to have multiple truths, whilst another believes that there is a single truth, this will cause conflict?
How do you think you perceive health information?
/end
/end
