My favorite approache is Grounded theory approach as a widely respected research paradigm that emphasizes the generation of theory from data. This approach allows for a systematic yet flexible method of conducting research, particularly in the social sciences. One of the key strengths of grounded theory is its ability to uncover new insights and understandings from the perspectives of the participants themselves. By utilizing a rigorous process of data collection and analysis, grounded theory enables researchers to develop theories that are firmly grounded in the empirical evidence. This approach also encourages a holistic and inductive approach to research, allowing for the exploration of complex phenomena in their natural context. Overall, grounded theory offers a valuable framework for conducting research that is both rigorous and insightful, making it my favorite research paradigm.

I usually favourite behaviour paradigm because it descuse behaviour organisation,and how manager makes desction.and improve hise job.

Thank you Souad Abdelwahed Selmi , for taking the time to respond with such a detailed response. This is appreciated. I also appreciate the value of grounded theory and consider it to be a very powerful paradigm thereof.

Thank you Abeer Zehree . In terms of examining behavior and/or decision-making then it could form part of the ‘interpretivism’ or ‘constructivism’ paradigm.

My favourite paradigm is Enaction. It's about living being situated/situating cognition. https://masciotradomenico.wixsite.com/aenaction1

Many thanks Domenico Masciotra for sharing your thoughts and link thereof. This is fascinating to know. It seems to also have a pragmatic touch to it.

Sachin Suknunan Thanks Joachin. I agree with your reading of the information found on my website. The enactive approach is based on going back and forth between the practical and the theoretical. And your question is fundamental for research and theorizing.

Weber, M. (2011). Methodology of Social Sciences (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315124445

Max Weber wrote these methodological essays in the closest intimacy with actual research and against a background of constant and intensive meditation on substantive problems in the theory and strategy of the social sciences. They were written between 1903 and 1917, the most productive of Max Weber's life, when he was working on his studies in the sociology of religion and Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Weber had done important work in economic and legal history and had taught economic theory. On the basis of original investigations, he had acquired a specialist's knowledge of the details of German economic and social structure. His always vital concern for the political prosperity of Germany among the nations thrust him deeply into discussion of political ideals and programs. Weber's methodology still holds interest for us. Some of its shortcomings, from the contemporary viewpoint, may be attributed to the fact that some of the methodological problems Sachin Suknunan that he treated could not be satisfactorily resolved prior to certain actual developments in research technique. These few qualifications aside, the work remains a pioneering work in large scale social research, from one of the field's masters.

___________

Causal analysis provides absolutely no value judgment, and a value judgment is absolutely not a causal explanation.

Max Weber

(on the methodology of the social sciences)

Thank you Stephen I. Ternyik . Wonderful response. I also salute/enjoyed Webers contributions and his distinction between causal analysis and value judgment as you have stated- "Causal analysis provides absolutely no value judgment, and a value judgment is absolutely not a causal explanation" (great)

Constructivism in a research-based STEM curriculum design.

Thank you Zoncita D. Norman . Constructivism is a great paradigm that allows you to construct/create your own understanding. Therefore i feel it promotes deep/critical thinking and real-time learning (learn as you construct).