A New Epistemic and Methodological Approach to the Study of Violence

  • Beth M. Titchiner
Part of the Critical Political Theory and Radical Practice book series (CPTRP)


This chapter presents a new epistemic and methodological framework for the study of violence. Arguing that both idealist (e.g. post-structural) and foundationalist (e.g. positivist) epistemologies are both inadequate, a new epistemic framework is presented which draws on updated early Frankfurt-School critical theory, post-Husserlian phenomenology, and Critical Realism. Key epistemic attitudes are discussed, such as a dialectical approach to ‘bracketing’ based in a more phenomenologically grounded concept of intersubjectivity and a resistance to ‘identity thinking’, as well as emphasis on the multidimensionality and processual nature of phenomena. Grounded in this epistemic framework, a methodological approach is outlined, which draws on aspects of ‘radical enquiry’ and Grounded Theory, and a compatible approach to causality. The data collection and analysis methods upon which this book is based are also outlined, which include a ‘naturalistic enquiry’ approach to participant observation and a multidimensional causal chain analysis.


  1. Adelman, C., Kemmis, S., & Jenkins, D. (1980). Rethinking Case Study: Notes from the Second Cambridge Conference. In H. Simons (Ed.), Towards a Science of the Singular (pp. 45–61). Norwich: University of East Anglia.Google Scholar
  2. Adorno, T. W. (1973). Negative Dialectics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Agrosino, M. V. (2012). Observation-Based Research. In J. Arthur, M. Waring, R. Coe, & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), Research Methods and Methodologies in Education (pp. 165–169). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, E. (2012). Epistemic Justice as a Virtue of Social Institutions. Social Epistemology, 26(2), 163–173.Google Scholar
  5. Arsenault, N., & Anderson, G. (1998). Fundamentals of Educational Research. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  6. Ashley, L. D. (2012). Case Study Research. In J. Arthur, M. Waring, R. Coe, & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), Research Methods and Methodologies in Education (pp. 102–107). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Bhaskar, R. (1979). The Possibility of Naturalism: A Philosophical Critique of the Contemporary Human Sciences. Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theories and Methods (5th ed.). London: Pearson.Google Scholar
  9. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1944). A Constant Frame of Reference for Sociometric Research: Part II. Experiment and Interference. Sociometry, 7, 40–75.Google Scholar
  10. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments in Nature and Design. London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bronfenbrenner, U. (2005). Making Human Beings Human: Bioecological Perspectives on Human Development. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K. (2007). The Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  13. Clough, P., & Nutbrown, C. (2012). A Student’s Guide to Methodology (3rd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Cook, D. (2005). From the Actual to the Possible: Nonidentity Thinking. Constellations, 12(1), 21–35.Google Scholar
  16. Cresswell, J. W. (2014). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. London: Pearson.Google Scholar
  17. Cruickshank, J. (2003). Realism and Sociology: Anti-Foundationalism, Ontology and Social Research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Dobbert, M. L., & Kurth-Schai, R. (1992). Systematic Ethnography: Toward an Evolutionary Science of Education and Culture. In M. LeCompte, W. L. Millroy, & J. Preissle (Eds.), The Handbook of Qualitative Research in Education (pp. 93–160). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  19. Douven, I. (2011). Abduction. Retrieved June 17, 2016, from
  20. Edkins, J. (2002). Forget Trauma? Responses to September 11. International Relations, 16(2), 243–256.Google Scholar
  21. Edkins, J. (2003). Trauma and the Memory of Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Fleetwood, S. (2013, September 20). What Is (and What Isn’t) Critical Realism? [Research Seminar]. Centre for Employment Studies, University of West England.Google Scholar
  23. Fletcher, A. J. (2016). Applying Critical Realism in Qualitative Research: Methodology Meets Method. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20(2), 181–194.Google Scholar
  24. Forrester, J. (1971). World Dynamics. Cambridge: Wright-Allen Press.Google Scholar
  25. Fricker, M. (1999). Epistemic Oppression and Epistemic Privilege. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 29(sup1), 191–210.Google Scholar
  26. Fricker, M. (2013). Epistemic Justice as a Condition of Political Freedom? Synthese, 190(7), 1317–1332.Google Scholar
  27. Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  28. Glaser, B. (1998). Doing Grounded Theory: Issues and Discussions. Mill Valley: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
  29. Glaser, B. (2010). Grounded Theory Is the Study of a Concept. [Video Lecture]. Retrieved June 17, 2016, from
  30. Hammer, R., & McLaren, P. (1991). Rethinking the Dialectic: A Social Semiotic Perspective for Educators. Educational Theory, 41(1), 23–46.Google Scholar
  31. Harich, J. (2010). Change Resistance as the Crux of the Environmental Sustainability Problem. System Dynamics Review, 26(1), 35–72.Google Scholar
  32. Hitchcock, G., & Hughes, D. (1989). Research and the Teacher. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Horkheimer, M., & Adorno, T. W. (2002). Dialectic of Enlightenment. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Hutchinson, S. A. (1988). Education and Grounded Theory. In R. R. Sherman & R. B. Webb (Eds.), Qualitative Research in Education: Focus and Methods (pp. 123–140). London: RoutledgeFalmer.Google Scholar
  35. Jarvis, P. (2009). Learning to Be a Person in Society: Learning to Be Me. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary Theories of Learning: Learning Theorists… In Their Own Words (pp. 21–23). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Kelle, U. (1995). Theories as Heuristic Tools in Qualitative Research. In I. Maso, P. A. Atkinson, S. Delamot, & J. C. Verhoeven (Eds.), Openness in Research: The Tension Between Self and Other (pp. 33–50). Assen: Van Gorcum.Google Scholar
  37. Kurki, M. (2008). Causation in International Relations: Reclaiming Causal Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Leithäuser, T. (1976). Formen des Alltagsbewusstseins. Frankfurt: Campus.Google Scholar
  39. Lichtman, M. (2006). Qualitative Research in Education: A User’s Guide. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  40. Lofland, J. (1971). Analyzing Social Settings. Belmont: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  41. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2006). Designing Qualitative Research. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  42. Maxwell, J. A. (2012). A Realist Approach for Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  43. Mclaren, P. L. (1995). Collisions with Otherness: “Travelling” Theory, Postcolonial Criticism, and the Politics of Ethnographic Practice – The Mission of the Wounded Ethnographer. In P. L. McLaren & J. M. Giarelli (Eds.), Critical Theory and Educational Research (pp. 271–300). New York: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  44. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1964). The Primacy of Perception. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Merleau-Ponty, M. (2012). Phenomenology of Perception. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  46. Moghaddam, A. (2006). Coding Issues in Grounded Theory. Issues in Educational Research, 16(1), 52–66.Google Scholar
  47. Morrison, K. R. B. (2009). Causation in Educational Research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  48. Nisbet, J., & Watt, J. (1984). Case Study. In J. Bell, T. Bush, A. Fox, J. Goodey, & S. Goulding (Eds.), Conducting Small-Scale Investigations in Educational Management (pp. 79–92). London: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  49. Norris, N., & Walker, R. (2005). Naturalistic Enquiry. In B. Somekh & C. Lewin (Eds.), Research Methods in the Social Sciences (pp. 131–137). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  50. Nurjannah, I., Mills, J., Park, T., & Usher, K. (2014). Conducting a Grounded Theory Study in a Language Other Than English. SAGE Open, 4(1), 1–10.Google Scholar
  51. Parr, S. (2013). Integrating Critical Realist and Feminist Methodologies: Ethical and Analytical Dilemmas. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18, 193–207.Google Scholar
  52. Patton, M. Q. (1980). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  53. Pearl, L. (2009). Causality. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Piaget, J. (1977). The Development of Thought: Equilibration of Cognitive Structures. New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar
  55. Redman-MacLaren, M., & Mills, J. (2015). Transformational Grounded Theory: Theory, Voice, and Action. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 14(3), 1–12.Google Scholar
  56. Rockmore, T. (2004). On Foundationalism: A Strategy for Metaphysical Realism. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  57. Rogers, C. R. (1961). On Becoming a Person. London: Constable.Google Scholar
  58. Sartre, J. P. (1956). Being and Nothingness: An Essay in Phenomenological Ontology. New York: Washington Square Press.Google Scholar
  59. Schick, K. (2009). To Lend a Voice To Suffering Is a Condition For All Truth: Adorno and International Political Thought. Journal of International Political Theory, 5(2), 138–160.Google Scholar
  60. Sherman, D. (2007). Sartre and Adorno: The Dialectics of Subjectivity. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  61. Smith, R. C. (2011). Consciousness and Revolt: An Exploration Toward Reconciliation. Holt: Heathwood Press.Google Scholar
  62. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  63. Thornberg, R. (2012a). Grounded Theory. In J. Arthur, M. Waring, R. Coe, & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), Research Methods and Methodologies in Education (pp. 85–93). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  64. Thornberg, R. (2012b). Informed Grounded Theory. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 56(3), 243–259.Google Scholar
  65. Titchiner, B. M. (2017). The Epistemology of Violence: Understanding the Root Causes of Violence and Non-conducive Social Circumstances in Schooling, with a Case-Study from Brazil. Digital Thesis. University of East Anglia. Retrieved from
  66. Waring, M. (2012). Grounded Theory. In J. Arthur, M. Waring, R. Coe, & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), Research Methods and Methodologies in Education (pp. 297–308). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  67. White, C. (2006). Agents, Structures and International Relations: Politics as Ontology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Wider, K. (1997). The Bodily Nature of Consciousness: Sartre and Contemporary Philosophy of Mind. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  70. Zizek, S. (2002a). For They Know Not What They Do: Enjoyment as Political Factor. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  71. Zizek, S. (2002b). Welcome to the Desert of the Real! Five Essays on September 11 and Related Dates. London: Verso.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Beth M. Titchiner
    • 1
  1. 1.NorwichUK

Personalised recommendations