define critical realism in research

Education Studies

What is critical realism, critical realism.

Critical Realism (CR) is a branch of philosophy that distinguishes between the 'real' world and the 'observable' world. The 'real' can not be observed and exists independent from human perceptions, theories, and constructions. The world as we know and understand it is constructed from our perspectives and experiences, through what is 'observable'. Thus, according to critical realists, unobservable structures cause observable events and the social world can be understood only if people understand the structures that generate events.

Critical Realism and Science

We can use the analogy of a scientist to understand some core tenets of CR. When a scientist conducts an experiment, they establish the conditions to create the experiment and they observe the results (events). However, the results are caused by underlying theoretical mechanisms, structures and laws that they can not observe (unobservable structures).

The scientist's understanding is through epistemological constructivism and relativism. This is where the phrase Critical Realism originates from- the 'epistemic fallacy' that is reducing what we say is 'real' or exists (ontological statements) to what we can know or understand about the 'real' (epistemological statements). The real are the unobservable mechanisms that cause events. Epistemology and ontology are separate.

CR evolved from the writings of the philosopher Roy Bhaskar (A Realist Theory of Science, 1975). In this text Bhaskar lays the foundations of CR with his thesis for transcendental realism. He states that in order for science as a body of knowledge and methodology to work or be intelligible, then epistemology and ontology need to be separated and we must distinguish between the transitive and intransitive bodies of knowledge or dimensions. Transitive knowledge relates to qualities of changeability or provisionality of our knowledge of the real, thus the transitive dimension comprises of our theories of the events and structures that we seek to understand in the intransitive dimension.

Q. Does Bhaskar's notion of a stratfiied reality acount for why theories can reach different conclusions?

Q. How does Bhaskar justify the definition 'critical'? Is this a persuasive definition?

Q. CR distinguishes between causes, events and what we can know about events. In order for a causal eplanation to be valid, the explanatory power must be upheld outside of observable knowledge of specific events. Where does this definition apply to the social world and where does it not work?

Archer, M. S. (1998). Critical realism : Essential readings. London ; New York: Routledge.

Bhaskar, R. (1975). A realist theory of science. York: Books.

Bhaskar, R. (2002). Reflections on meta-reality : Transcendence, emancipation, and everyday life. New Delhi ; Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.

Bhaskar, R., & Danermark, B. (2006). Metatheory, interdisciplinarity and disability research: A critical realist perspective. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 8(4), 278-297.

Brant, J., & Panjwani, F. (2015). School Economics and the Aims of Education: Critique and Possibilities. Journal of Critical Realism, 14(3), 306-324.

Collier, A. (1994). Critical realism: An introduction to roy bhaskar's philosophy. London ; New York: Verso.

Danermark, B. (2002). Interdisciplinary research and critical realism: The example of disability research. Journal of Critical Realism, 5(1), 56-64.

Danermark, B., Ekstrom, M., & Jakobsen, L. (2001). Explaining society: an introduction to critical realism in the social sciences. Routledge.

Danermark, B., & Gellerstedt, L. C. (2004). Social justice: Redistribution and recognition—a non-reductionist perspective on disability. Disability & Society, 19(4), 339-353.

Dean, K. (2006). Realism, philosophy and social science. Basingstoke England ; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Easton, G. (2010). Critical realism in case study research. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(1), 118-128. doi:DOI: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2008.06.004

Gorski, P. S. (2013). What is critical realism? And why should you care?. Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews, 42(5), 658-670.

Hartwig, M. (Ed.). (2015). Dictionary of critical realism. Routledge.

Scott, D. (2013). Education, epistemology and critical realism. Routledge.

Zachariadis, M., Scott, S. V., & Barrett, M. I. (2013). Methodological Implications of Critical Realism for Mixed-Methods Research. MIS quarterly, 37(3), 855-879.

1. A mind-map on key ideas in CR: https://www.mindmeister.com/160541119/critical-realism

2. http://understandingsociety.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/what-is-about-critical-realism.html

3. http://international-criticalrealism.com/about-critical-realism/basic-critical-realism/

4. Links to a reading list on CR: http://jeffreylonghofer.com/page4/page38/page134/page136/

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, critical realism: what you should know and how to apply it.

Qualitative Research Journal

ISSN : 1443-9883

Article publication date: 15 December 2020

Issue publication date: 2 August 2021

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the critical realism (CR) philosophical viewpoint and how it can be applied in qualitative research. CR is a relatively new and viable philosophical paradigm proposed as an alternative to the more predominant paradigms of positivism, interpretivism and pragmatism. This paper reviews the concept, its benefits and limitation. It goes further to provide an example of how CR is used as a philosophical and methodological framework with the systems thinking theory to applied qualitative research.

Design/methodology/approach

A study of project management challenges in a Nigerian government organisation is used to demonstrate a qualitative research approach, which includes a coding process and data analysis that is consistent with CR ontology and epistemology.

CR focuses primarily on closed systems. However, a more accurate explanation of reality is obtained in addition to the identification of contextual causal mechanisms in the context of study when a general systems theory is applied.

Research limitations/implications

The knowledge about the nature of relationships obtained in the context of study may not necessarily be replicated in another context. However, this paper elucidates a CR process that is generalisable by demonstrating how a theory is applied in a different context.

Originality/value

The paper demonstrates how systems theory is used to understand interactions in a CR paradigm. It engages with CR approach critically and illustrates a clear example of how CR can be applied in social research.

Critical realism
Systems thinking
Data analysis

Acknowledgements

No funding nor potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Lawani, A. (2021), "Critical realism: what you should know and how to apply it", Qualitative Research Journal , Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 320-333. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-08-2020-0101

Emerald Publishing Limited

We’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

Critical Realism as an Underpinning Philosophy

First Online: 07 May 2022

Cite this chapter

Jenny Gilbert 3 &
Simon Pratt-Adams 4

363 Accesses

This chapter defines and explains the terms ontology and epistemology, discusses the development of the scientific method and the nature of causation. It introduces critical realism and its relationship to systems thinking. The suppositions of the regularity theory are that cause and effect are governed by universal laws. In contrast, critical realism asserts that it is entities that have causal powers. Induction, deduction and retroduction are described, emphasising the difference between the terms and their relevance. The originator of critical realism, Roy Bhaskar, maintained that while objects are mind-independent, our observation of events is theory-laden. Bhaskar posits a stratified ontology consisting of three domains, the real, the actual and the empirical. The epistemic fallacy is explained in relation to the existence of the real domain. It is not possible to know everything, critical realism accepts that there are unknown unknowns. Throughout these complex ontological and epistemological arguments, multiple examples are provided to assist one’s understanding. This chapter aims to convince the reader that stepping into the paddling pool of ontology and epistemology is worthwhile and serves to provide a sturdy foundation on which to build a research project.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Available as EPUB and PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Compact, lightweight edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info
Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Archer, M. Bhaskar, R., Collier, A., Lawson, T., & Norrie, A. (1998). Critical realism: Essential readings . Routledge.

Google Scholar

Baert, P. (2005). Philosophy of the social sciences: Towards pragmatism . Polity Press.

Beer, S. (1972). Brain of the firm: The managerial cybernetics of organisations . Wiley.

Bell, J. (1987). Doing your research project: A guide for first-time researchers in education and social science . Open University Press.

Benton, T. (1998). Realism and social science: Some comments on Roy Bhaskar’s ‘the possibility of naturalism’. In M. Archer, R. Bhaskar, A. Collier, T. Lawson, & A. Norrie (Eds.), Critical realism: Essential readings (pp. 297–312). Routledge.

Benton, T., & Craib, I. (2011). Philosophy of social science: The philosophical foundations of social thought . Palgrave Macmillan.

Bhaskar, R. (1975). A realist theory of science . Verso.

Blaxter, L., Hughes, C., & Tight, M. (1996). How to research . Open University Press.

Bhaskar, R. (1979). The possibility of naturalism . Routledge.

Burch, R. (2018, Winter). Charles Sanders Peirce. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopaedia of philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2918/entries/peirce/

Capra, F., & Luisi, P. L. (2014). The systems view of life: A unifying vision . Cambridge University Press.

Checkland, P. B. (1981). Systems thinking, systems practice . Wiley.

Checkland, P. B., & Scholes, J. (1990). Soft systems methodology in action . Wiley.

Condie, J. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in media psychology. [Online] Retrieved from https://www.slideshare.net/jennacondie/qualitative-content-analysis-in-media-psychology (slide 15).

Cottingham, J. (2008). How to read Descartes . Granta Publications.

Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., Jackson, P., & Lowe, A. (2008). Management research: An introduction . Sage Publications Ltd.

Eddington, A. S. (1927). The meaning of the physical world . Macmillan Company.

Edwards, P. K., O’Mahoney, J., & Vincent, S. (2014). Critical realism as an empirical project: A beginner’s guide. In P. K. Edwards, J. O’Mahoney, & S. Vincent (Eds.), Studying organizations using critical realism: A practical guide (pp. 1–20). Oxford University Press.

Elder-Vass, D. (2010). The causal power of social structures: Emergence, structure and agency . Cambridge University Press.

Feldman, F. (1970). Leibniz and “Leibniz’ Law”. The Philosophical Review, 79 (4), 510–522.

Fleetwood, S. (2001). Causal laws, functional relations and tendencies. Review of Political Economy, 13 (2), 201–220.

Griffith, T. (2011). Hume: The essential philosophical works . Wordsworth Editions Limited.

Groff, R. (2017). Causal mechanisms and the philosophy of causation. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 47 (3), 286–305.

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1982). Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic inquiry. Educational Communication and Technology, 30 (4), 233–252.

Harré, R., & Madden, E. (1975). Causal powers: A theory of natural necessity . Blackwell.

Hempel, C. G. (1942). The function of general laws in history. The Journal of Philosophy, 39 (2), 35–48.

Hempel, C. G. (1968). Explanation in science and in history. In P. H. Nidditch (Ed.), The philosophy of science (pp. 54–79). Oxford University Press.

Hesse, M. (1974). The structure of scientific inference . University of California Press.

Hume, D. (2003: 1740). A treatise of human nature. Dover Publications Inc.

Lewis, C. S. (1950). The lion, the witch and the wardrobe . HarperCollins.

Mingers, J. (2000). The contribution of critical realism as an underpinning philosophy for OR/MS and systems. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 51 (11), 1256–1270.

Mingers, J. (2002). Viewpoint – Reply to Ormerod – The importance of being real. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 5 (3), 351–354.

Mingers, J. (2006). Realising systems thinking: Knowledge and action in management science . Springer.

Mingers, J. (2014). Systems thinking, critical realism and philosophy: A confluence of ideas . Routledge.

Morse, J. M., Swanson, J. M., & Kuzel, A. J. (2001). The status of qualitative research as evidence. In J. M. Morse, J. M. Swanson, & A. J. Kuzel (Eds.), The nature of qualitative evidence . Sage.

Mumford, S. (2008). Powers, dispositions, properties or a causal manifesto. In R. Groff (Ed.), Revitalizing causality (pp. 139–151). Routledge.

Niiniluoto, I. (1999). Critical scientific realism . Oxford University Press.

O’Gorman, K., & MacIntosh, R. (2017). Research methods for business and management: A guide to writing your dissertation . Goodfellow Publishers Ltd.

Ormerod, R. J. (2002). Viewpoint: Should critical realism really be critical for OR? A comment on Mingers (2000): The contribution of critical realism as an underpinning philosophy for OR=MS and systems. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 53 (3), 347–359.

Rumsfeld, D. H. (2002, February 12). DOD news briefing: Secretary Rumsfeld. US Department of Defense. Retrieved from http://archive.defense.gov/Transcripts/Transcript.aspx?TranscriptID=2636

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students . Pearson Education Limited.

Sayer, R. A. (1992). Method in social science: A realist approach . Sage.

Silverman, D. (2000). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook . Sage.

Thomasson, A. (2010). The controversy over the existence of ordinary objects. Philosophy Compass, 5 (7), 591–601.

Tomassi, P. (1999). Logic . Routledge.

von Bertalanffy, L. (1950). An outline of general systems theory. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 1 (2), 134–165.

Westra, R. (2019). Roy Bhaskar’s critical realism and the social science of Marxian economics. Review of Radical Political Economics, 51 (3), 365–382.

Wiggins, D. (1968). On being in the same place at the same time. Philosophical Review, 77 (1), 90–95.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Reviewer for the Quality Assurance Agency in Higher Education, Cambridge, UK

Jenny Gilbert

Centre for Innovation in Higher Education in Anglia Learning and Teaching; and School of Education and Social Care in the Faculty of Health, Education, Medicine and Social Care, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK

Simon Pratt-Adams

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Gilbert, J., Pratt-Adams, S. (2022). Critical Realism as an Underpinning Philosophy. In: Soft Systems Methodology in Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99225-5_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99225-5_2

Published : 07 May 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-99224-8

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-99225-5

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

Correspondence
Open access
Published: 27 November 2019

Developing a critical realist informed framework to explain how the human rights and social determinants of health relationship works

Fiona Haigh ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5706-5118 1 , 2 ,
Lynn Kemp 3 ,
Patricia Bazeley 3 &
Neil Haigh 4

BMC Public Health volume 19 , Article number: 1571 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

46k Accesses

39 Citations

15 Altmetric

Metrics details

That there is a relationship between human rights and health is well established and frequently discussed. However, actions intended to take account of the relationship between human rights and social determinants of health have often been limited by lack of clarity and ambiguity concerning how these rights and determinants may interact and affect each other. It is difficult to know what to do when you do not understand how things work. As our own understanding of this consideration is founded on perspectives provided by the critical realist paradigm, we present an account of and commentary on our application of these perspectives in an investigation of this relationship.

We define the concept of paradigm and review critical realism and related implications for construction of knowledge concerning this relationship. Those implications include the need to theorise possible entities involved in the relationship together with their distinctive properties and consequential power to affect one another through exercise of their respective mechanisms (ways of working). This theorising work enabled us identify a complex, multi-layered assembly of entities involved in the relationship and some of the array of causal mechanisms that may be in play. These are presented in a summary framework.

Researchers’ views about the nature of knowledge and its construction inevitably influence their research aims, approaches and outcomes. We demonstrate that by attending to these views, which are founded in their paradigm positioning, researchers can make more progress in understanding the relationship between human rights and the social determinants of health, in particular when engaged in theorizing work. The same approaches could be drawn on when other significant relationships in health environments are investigated.

Peer Review reports

Context and case

Global initiatives such as the WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health, the 2011 Rio Declaration, and 2015 Sustainable Development Goals, identify human rights as key to addressing inequities in social determinants of health. Correspondingly, there have also been calls from human rights monitoring bodies – including the United Nations (UN) Commission on Human Rights, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to health [ 1 , 2 , 3 ] - for the development of health impact assessment tools and approaches that can provide insights into ways government actions affect the right to health. However, action specifically based in a human rights approach to identifying and addressing social determinants of health has been limited and these major global initiatives have been critiqued. While acknowledging the role of rights, few initiatives have explicitly attempted to incorporate rights into actions and priorities [ 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 ]. Chapman describes how

reticence to recognize the shared agenda and potential contribution of the human rights paradigm is particularly surprising in view of the Commission secretariat’s recommendation that the CSDH adopt a rights-based approach as an appropriate conceptual framework to advance towards health equity through action on the social determinants of health [ 5 ]

However, we think that this situation is not unsurprising as there is currently a lack of underpinning understanding of how human rights (HRs) and social determinants of health (SDOH) interact and affect each other: how the relationship can ‘work’. Further, there are differing conceptualisations of the determinants of health used in human rights and public health that have important implications for how relationships between SDOH and health rights are understood [ 4 , 7 ]. For example, human rights conceptualisations of social determinants of health often fail to take into account how determinants interact with each other and also to consider the structural determinants of health [ 5 ]. Current human rights interpretations of the right to the highest attainable standard of health and healthcare and health determinants contained in reports from human rights bodies may miss important causes due to human rights narrower conceptualisation of determinants of health. Conceptual models used to understand and describe how the SDOH shape people’s lives are often limited to a narrow range of causal pathways that reflect particular disciplinary perspectives [ 9 , 10 , 11 ].

We also propose that these apparent disciplinary differences may reflect, in turn, more fundamental differences and variations in points of view about reality, the nature of knowledge that we attempt to construct about what we construe to be real and how we should go about constructing and evaluating knowledge: different ‘paradigms’ may be in play. From this perspective, we believe that attempts to develop knowledge about particular phenomena require explicit attention by researchers to their ‘paradigm positioning’. As Carter and Little [ 12 ] observe, it is impossible to create knowledge “without at least tacit assumptions about what knowledge is and how it is constructed”. Conversely, those who read accounts of such attempts need to take into account the paradigm position of the researchers.

To clarify and illustrate the implications of this stance, we define the notion of a paradigm, outline the key tenets of our own paradigm position – critical realism, and then describe in detail how we applied these tenets to develop theory about the relationship between human rights and the social determinants of health.

To demonstrate key points, we use a case study of the Vermont Right to Health Care Campaign [ 13 ]. Vermont is a small state in the northeast of the USA with a population of just over 600,000. The United States does not have a Universal Health Care (UHC) system. Healthcare is paid for through a mix of private insurance and government funded health insurance schemes for particular population groups. In 2008, the Vermont Workers’ Center (VWC) began a “Health Care is a Human Right” campaign. The campaign adopted human rights principles to guide all its work. The VWC developed a staged approach which first focussed on building power through activating Vermonters, then directly targeting the legislature. We applied a CR explanatory framework to explain how a human rights-based approach can work to influence access to health care. Details of the case study are described in a separate publication [ 13 ]. In conjunction with this case study, we provide a reflective critique on our use of a CR-based theorizing methodology.

The concept of a research paradigm

The matter with human beans is that they is absolutely refusing to believe in anything unless they is actually seeing it right in front of their own schnozzles The BFG

We understand a paradigm to constitute four categories of interrelated views that underpin our conceptions of knowledge and knowing: ontology – one’s understanding of the nature of reality and what can be known about that reality; epistemology – understanding of the nature of knowledge, the ‘getting to know’ process, the relationship between the person who seeks to know and the knowledge they construct, and the criteria for making claims about knowledge; methodology – approach to the construction of knowledge; and axiology – the influence of values on knowledge that is acquired and how it is acquired. A coherent set of views in relation to these four considerations constitutes a paradigm position.

As previously noted, different disciplines and subject matter fields have developed traditions in relation to these views. For example, medical sciences have tended to adopt a positivist or post-positivist paradigm, based on the view that what is real, and therefore knowable, is what can be observed ‘out there’ and measured. This perspective is also apparent in some conceptions of human rights as legal rules found within treaties [ 14 ]. In contrast, social sciences often adopt a social constructivist paradigm which rests on the view that what is real is what our individual minds ‘make’ real to us; reality is a construction – by and of the mind. And, the knowledge that we construct about these in-the-mind realities is influenced by the social relationships in which we are embedded. From this perspective, “there exist multiple, socially constructed realities ungoverned by natural laws, causal or otherwise” [ 15 ]. The relationship between different fields and paradigm positions is more nuanced than presented here and within specific fields there exist a mix paradigm perspectives [ 16 , 17 ] but for the purposes of this paper the main point is that differing ontological and epistemological positions have implications for the questions researchers seek to answer, the methodologies they employ, the data they gather - and the ways in which data are gathered, analysed and interpreted. For example, while social constructionists are more likely than positivists to be interested in investigating qualitative differences in the meanings people give to experiences, positivists are more likely to be interested in identifying stable relationships between things and substantiating these relationships using generalisable quantitative data. Differences in paradigm positioning might also be linked to different social groups or cultures. For example, in New Zealand researchers give explicit consideration to Maori ontology and epistemology [ 18 ] and Maori specific research methodology (Kaupapa Maori). Some researchers, especially those employing mixed methods, adopt a pragmatic paradigm position in which their view of reality is based on and tested through experience. They choose methods, therefore, based on their experience of what works best for answering their research questions. While some researchers have an explicit awareness of their paradigm position and communicate it in research publications, others have an implicit position only.

Critical realism research paradigm – key features and relevance to human rights and social determinants of health

Critical realism (CR) is a relatively new paradigm position. It represents a combination of views that contrast with those associated with traditional positivist and interpretivist positions [ 19 , 20 , 21 ]. An increasing number of public health, and to a lesser extent human rights, scholars are adopting a CR position [e.g] [ 9 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 ]. There is also now a large body work in the area of realist evaluation which is informed by a critical realist research paradigm [ 26 ], including examples in this journal [e.g] [ 27 , 28 , 29 ].

In the following sections we briefly elaborate on the key features of the critical realist research paradigm.

According to CR, there is a reality that exists independent of our thoughts about it, and while observing may make us more confident about what exists, existence itself is not dependent on observation [ 19 ]. An example of this is that people have the right to health even when they are not aware of it. While we can acquire or construct knowledge about reality, that knowledge can be fallible, or mistaken.

Reality is stratified into three domains: empirical, actual and real. The real domain consists of entities or structures which have properties that give them the power to activate mechanisms that can affect other structures (i.e. causal mechanisms); the actual domain consists of events and their effects that have been caused by the activation of causal mechanisms; and the empirical domain represents actual events-effects that can be, or have been, observed or experienced. For example, human rights may be observable at the empirical level through asking people about their beliefs and attitudes towards human rights. The actual level consists of what happens when people’s rights to the determinants of health such as education, housing, health care, freedom from discrimination are fulfilled or neglected. These events-effects can only be explained with reference to the real level, where unseen causal powers associated with such entities as class, gender, and capitalism are triggered.

The world is made up of entities that have properties that endow them with powers and liabilities. Events happen when the powers of one or more entities are activated. Because of the stratified nature of reality, entities can be invisible or visible. This means they can include non-physical things such as ideas, theories, concepts or institutions, as well as physical entities such as cigarettes or guns. In the social world, entities are often invisible (e.g. human rights, discrimination, capitalism). These invisible entities are not observable at the empirical level, but the effects of their activated powers/mechanisms may be observable (e.g. health outcomes, access to health services, health service costs, measured inequalities). A CR approach also understands absence of entities as being causally efficacious. Critical realism provides a critique of ‘ontological monovalence’, which is the idea that only things that are present exist [ 21 , 30 ]. Just as when lack of rain causes a drought, or in the case of Vermont, lack of access to health care causes unmet health needs or lack of respect for rights causes suffering, rights are often most causally powerful and important when they are absent. Activation, which involves the exercise of particular mechanisms, is contingent on other entities and their mechanisms (context).

Knowledge is transitive– our understanding of a phenomenon can change. While entities exist independent of our ability to perceive and conceive that they exist, we do use our minds to construct knowledge about them. As the construction of knowledge can never be infallible – sometimes we construct misconceptions or mistaken theories – our knowledge of the world is transitive. It is open to challenge and change. This CR epistemological perspective means that we recognize that theory that we have developed about human rights and health may in time be extended, modified or rejected, notwithstanding our attempt to ensure its trustworthiness and practical adequacy. A theory is not intransitive, as reality is.

The social world is a layered, complex and open system. Within this system, multiple entities are present, the types of entities are wide ranging, each entity may subsume other entities or be subsumed within other entities, and a vast array of these entities’ mechanisms may be activated and in play moment by moment. For example, within the Vermont case study, entities that were attended to included organizations such as the Vermont Workers Centre, people such as political representatives, policies such as Health Care Policy, plans including those of the VWC campaign, goals such as improving access to health services, methods and tools such as letter writing and human rights assessment of proposals. Some people had multiple roles (e.g. doctor, campaigner, parent). As each entity had properties that endowed it with mechanisms which could enable, constrain or block the mechanisms of other entities, the actual interactions between entities and their effects were extremely complex. The exercise of mechanisms was often contingent on the mechanisms of another entity being activated. For example, the Vermont Workers Centre had its latent causal powers-mechanisms (e.g. to empower, to inform) activated when a group of people decided to exercise their power to ‘campaign for universal health care’. And, the exercise of some mechanisms was a manifestation of personal power to act (i.e. the exercise of agency by a Vermonter to write a letter) or the power of social structures over personal action (e.g. the activation of compliance mechanisms associated with the rules of accessing the Vermont Legislature). It was evident that causal power could shift between agency and structure. The exercise of some mechanisms (e.g. informing mechanisms of conducting human rights assessments of new proposals) lead to changes in the properties of entities (e.g. Vermont citizens gained knowledge of rights and corresponding state duties) and, in turn, power to exercise new mechanisms (e.g. to claim rights through a right to health rights campaign). They also lead to the emergence of new entities (e.g. new legislative proposals). In this sense, a social system is always open to and characterized by change. This contrasts with a system in which law-like regularities can be identified (e.g. signing human rights treaties invariably leads to decreases in human rights violations). In an open system, such relationships are context dependent [ 31 , 32 ].

Critical Realist methodology

From a CR perspective, the primary purpose of research, and therefore of the application of a methodology, is the theorizing of explanations for ‘tendencies’ in phenomena that have been observed or experienced (e.g. events, effects). These explanations focus on the mechanisms of entities that can generate events – as well as the properties of entities that empower them with such mechanisms. Bhaskar describes how “This is the arduous task of science: the production of the knowledge of those enduring and continually active mechanisms of nature that produce the phenomena of our world” (Bhaskar, 1975, p.47).

Tendencies may include recurrent relationships between phenomena, variability in such relationships or the absence of a relationship – and complexity is likely to characterize the interactions between entities and their associated mechanisms. Critical realists are pragmatic in their approach to methodology and methods. Because of the layered nature of reality, multiple disciplines and methodological approaches may be needed to understand the multilevel relationships between human rights and social determinant of health. Research design should be ‘practically adequate’: that is,‘fit for purpose’ [ 30 ]. This allows space for the members of different disciplines to work together to understand a topic such as human rights and the social determinants of health.

Critical Realist axiology

Emancipatory objectives form part of a critical realist research agenda. Danermark points out that “A critical science often takes its starting point in notions that improvement of society is possible” [ 20 ].

The implication of this emancipatory worldview is that when phenomena are under investigation it may be possible to identify how these features may be influenced (e.g. properties, and therefore mechanisms, changed) in order to ameliorate harmful effects or to enhance beneficial effects. Thus, CR research has an inherent focus on ‘what to do’ to improve people’s human rights situation.

Critical realism, the social determinants of health and human rights

In the following sections, we describe how we drew on critical realist perspectives to develop theory about the relationship between human rights and social determinants of health. In doing so, we focus on two processes; structural analysis of human rights and social determinants of health and identifying causal relationships between social determinants of health and human rights. A framework summarizing the outcomes of these analysis and theorising processes is presented.

The general case for attending to paradigm position when undertaking such research is also made.

In order to develop explanatory theory, concerning the relationship between human rights and the social determinants of health, the entities themselves need to be described. What are human rights? What are social determinants of health? Each of these entities has a structure, a set of properties or attributes that differentiate it from other entities. In turn, those properties give the entity the power to activate or exercise mechanisms that can cause effects. These effects may, in turn, involve changes to the properties of an entity and, therefore its potential mechanisms. Description of these entities, from both perspectives (cause and effect), involves structural analysis.

Human rights attributes include the following: rights are norms ; rights exist within relationships between claim holders and duty bearers; rights have core principles that provide a framework for application; rights have substantive and procedural elements. These various properties may be further differentiated and described. For examples norms may be universal/community specific, clear/unclear, accepted/contested, non/conflicting. The specifics of properties determine whether and what mechanisms can be activated. In this instance, the mechanisms may include informing, guiding, persuading, preventing and enforcing. These mechanisms are latent because their activation is contingent on the mechanisms of another entity being activated (e.g. someone reads and thinks about the norm). Such contingent relationships are common in social environments. For example, the exercise of mechanisms associated with human rights norms can change the capacity of a community to hold duty bearers accountable for impacts on health and health rights. However, the capacity of rights holders to claim rights may also be contingent on the exercise of the mechanisms of education programs that are intended to facilitate learning about rights and ways of claiming rights (e.g. in Vermont, information derived from a human rights analysis was presented to Vermonters to inform them about how policy changes impacted on human rights obligations).

Social determinants of health are entities that can cause health-related effects on individuals and communities and that have the following general properties: they exist within the social environment, they result from decisions about how societies should be organised and ‘work’ (e.g. social norms, policies, practices, economic arrangements, politics, education) and they may change over time and vary across social groups and contexts. Again, the properties and associated mechanisms of specific entities (e.g. a health policy, housing policy, an education programme) can be elaborated and delineated with much greater precision using CR ontological perspectives and analysis processes. Questions that can help identify the properties of entities include:

What does the existence of this object/practice presuppose? What are its preconditions?

Can/could object A exist without B? If so, what else must be present?

What is it about this object, that enables it to do certain things (there may be several mechanisms at work and we need to seek ways to distinguish their respective efforts)?

What cannot be removed without making the object cease to exist in its present form?

[ 20 , 30 ].

When making a structural analysis of entities, it should not be assumed that entities that share the same name (e.g. disadvantaged community, race, gender, sexuality, disability, and ethnicity) have similar properties and consequential powers. This needs to be taken into account when the applicability of evidence from other research involving similar entities is considered. To what extent do they (e.g. affected communities) have common properties and therefore powers? Are the findings from other research relevant given contrastive properties and powers?

A further caveat concerns the attention that is given to what can be observed (the empirical domain). Critical realists contest the notion that what can be observed and measured is the thing itself [ 31 ]. This view, that Bhaskar calls the epistemic fallacy, reduces statements about the world (ontology) to statements about our knowledge of the world (epistemology) [ 21 ]. We see epistemic fallacy in some existing approaches to the right to health, that tend to focus on identifying changes to indicators. Indicators are used as proxies for human rights (e.g. ratification of human rights conventions, overall finance commitments for respecting human rights, number of employees and community members that have access to complaints, disputes, and grievance processes, access to health insurance). However, the focus on such observable and measurable indicators ignores whether or how the indicators correspond to the ‘actual’ experience of human rights and the ‘real’ properties and mechanisms of human rights. Without attention to the structural features of human rights and social determinants of health, it is difficult to theorize explanatory linkages between them and to develop recommendations that could result in changes to that relationship – and consequential health effects.

From a CR perspective, the way health rights are interpreted and discussed is also based on our understanding that may change over time – they are transitive understandings. The transitive nature can be seen in how legal conceptualisations of the right to health have been broadened over the years. And, if we are to avoid conflating entities with our ideas about them, we need to recognise that rights as ‘real things’ are not the same as our local/personal/temporal interpretations of them.

Theorising an explanatory framework

We present a critical realist informed framework for describing the environment that incorporates human rights and social determinants of health-related entities – and defines their relationship (Fig. 1 ). This framework emphasizes that these entities and relationships can be understood to exist within a stratified, laminated, emergent, open system that contains an assemblage of entities that have a relationship to human rights. Entities in health rights environments can take different forms such as physical, cultural, biological or social. Actors can be described in terms of the social relations and institutional structures they belong to. Actors belong to, and are influenced by, multiple institutions and structural relations – but also have agency to influence and change those structures. Differentiating between actors and structures emphasises people and their capabilities as one unit of analysis and institutions and social relations associated with systems as another. In this context, the key human rights relational structure is that between rights holders and duty bearers.

Critical Realist Human Rights and Social Determinants of Health Explanatory Framework

The framework can be subject to substantial elaboration, as below, which emphasizes the complexity of this environment. That complexity is reflected in the array of relationships that potentially exist between the numerous entities involved. Those relationships, which are defined by the activation and effects of mechanisms, explain how the environment ‘works’ (e.g. see Fig. 2 ). The framework can assist researchers to identify the mechanisms that may be in play and that should be subject to further in-depth investigation and development of explanatory theory. Key features of the framework are now identified and discussed. Some of the potential relationships and associated mechanisms are illustrated using the Vermont case study.

Vermont Case Study: Towards a theory of how the campaign worked

When we conceptualise the spaces where human rights play out as being laminated, we can begin to identify what entities and related mechanisms exist at different laminations and also to consider how the interplay of mechanisms and the specific context influences those mechanisms. Analysis of the relationship between human rights and health that doesn’t take account of the linkages between laminations may result in a focus on specific levels. For example, individual lifestyle factors (such as excessive alcohol use) may be attended to without a concurrent focus on possible more distal causes (for example, the colonisation history and racism within the country) that emanate from other laminations [ 9 , 32 ]. Bhaskar [ 33 ] identifies seven laminations and in the table below we identify examples of HR and SDOH entities and relationships across these laminations (see Table 1 ). The levels identify people, the physical environment and social structures as key entities. People themselves are also layered and “can be understood as a uniquely laminated layered structure, shaped by genetics, nurture and culture, so that each person has strong and partly predictable tendencies” [ 34 ]. People interact with entities and structures across these layers.

The relationships that exist between entities within and across laminations can often be characterized in terms of the relative power that entities have. Bhaskar describes two types of power relations linked to structure and agency [ 35 ]. Human rights infringements are often the result of repressive power relationships that enable some agents to maintain destructive, coercive and oppressive advantages over others’ interests [ 36 ]. These power relationships are often related to structures and beliefs related to class, gender, age and ethnicity. At the same time, power relationships can trigger creative, emancipatory and transformative mechanisms that enable and empower agents [ 36 ]. Although described by Alderson as different dimensions, these contrastive types of power could also be viewed as the extremes of one dimension (interpersonal relations). We can take account of dimensions of power when developing causal explanations and identifying what to do. In line with CRs emancipatory values, actions should target development of enabling and empowering relationships. Such relationships were evident in the campaign in Vermont which involved civil society actions intended to minimize coercive repressive relationships that were associated with neoliberal health care policies. The latter involved a relationship between access to money and access to health services. Attention to human/health rights emphasizes the need to consider power-related relationships and associated accountabilities, in particular between states and communities. As London and Schneider observe, this can help ensure there is

“the space for civil society action to engage with the legislature to hold public officials accountable and confirms the importance of rights as enabling civil society mobilization, reinforcing community agency to advance health rights for poor communities” [ 37 ]

Different types of data and disciplinary perspectives may be required to describe the entities that make up different slices or laminations of reality and the interplay between them [ 11 ]. To facilitate understanding of complex health rights environments and decisions about evidence, researchers and practitioners are likely to need to make use of more varied conceptual frameworks that are grounded in different disciplines and their related methodologies [ 20 ]. Understanding the role of entities within these different laminations may also require transdisciplinary work that goes beyond disciplines working in parallel or sequence, in order to utilise integrative approaches [ 38 , 39 ]. CR provides a coherent rationale for, and guidance on, the use of multiple data, methodologies and methods within SDOH and HR research. The coherence rests on the ontological and epistemological perspectives of CR which leads to a pluralist, as well as pragmatic, stance on these considerations.

In Vermont the laminated nature of the relationship between the human rights driven campaign and access to health care is illustrated using examples in Table 1 .

As illustrated in Fig. 2 , a wide range of mechanisms associated with the varied entities involved in the campaign were activated. These mechanisms related to learning about the right to health, community mobilisation, awareness raising in decision makers, framing of ideas, and responding to new developments. These mechanisms were contingent on contextual factors such as Vermont’s history of being a progressive state and the Vermont Workers Centre being well established with an existing base and relationships. Ultimately the campaign contributed to a number of outcomes described in Fig. 2 including human rights principles being incorporated into Vermont legislation.

We have argued that in order to advance our knowledge and understanding across a field that is characterised by multiple disciplinary perspectives and approaches, we need to think about the meaning of knowledge and knowing: we need to consider our research paradigm. To confirm this stance, we have presented and account of, and commentary on, our application of the critical realist paradigm in a project focusing on the relationship between HR and SDOH. The presentation is also intended to provide a transferable case study and model of critical realism ‘in action’. While this paradigm now underpins the research of an increasing number of researchers involved in health and rights related research, for many it is unfamiliar, challenging or even troublesome newcomer.

Given this agenda, we have highlighted the following aspects of the CR paradigm:

Critical realist ontology acknowledges the complexity inherent in social phenomena and provides a conceptual framework for describing this complexity. Descriptions of complexity, as we have illustrated, necessarily go beyond the empirical domain of reality (i.e. beyond what can be observed, experienced and measured).

Critical realists take a pluralist and pragmatic stance with respect to methodologies and methods that might be drawn on to theorising this complexity - and to the associated use of perspectives and approaches that may be multi-disciplinary, interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary. Critical realists seek to avoid being trapped within the silos of single disciplinary views. When theories that are founded in different paradigm positions and across different disciplines are drawn on, they are re-interpreted through a critical realist ontological lens. This represents a form of ‘abductive reasoning’ which, along with retroduction, is a distinctive feature of a CR theorising methodology.

CR adopts ‘practical adequacy’ as one of the criteria for evaluating new theory. Does the explanatory theory provide a foundation for actions that can be demonstrated to be beneficial rather than harmful? With this in mind, CR axiology supports social critique as a dimension of the research process.

Critical realists recognize that the constancy of change and emergence means that a ‘settled’ theory concerning the relationships between phenomena cannot be formulated. This calls into question the notion of determinants, as the term can imply a degree of stability that is not present. Constructs and propositions may be transient. At the same time, some differentiation of entities (properties, mechanisms and relationships) that may be relatively stable is possible, as illustrated in the Vermont case study.

The key features of human rights and SDOH environments, identified as an our outcome of our theorising work, include the following:

HR and SDOH environments are understood to be open, laminated, complex and adaptive systems.

Entities can take different forms such as physical, cultural, biological or social.

Actors can be described in terms of the social relations and institutional structures they belong to.

There is intersectionality of actors whereby actors belong to, and are influenced by, multiple institutions and structural relations - and can also be simultaneously individual, primary and corporate actors.

Understanding and explaining the relationship between human rights and SDOH requires going beyond the observable to consider structures, powers, and mechanisms and requires transdisciplinary work.

With respect to practical implications of our theorising work, we argue that successful implementation of global initiatives such as the Sustainable Development Goals requires more than the setting of targets and indicators. Structural analysis and development of explanatory theory is necessary if we are to understand what things are, how they work – and how they might work better. This type of research will enable the fields of public health and human rights to identify the fundamental causes of health and human rights inequities such as economic structures, class and racism, and to conceive ways of addressing them. Explicit and indepth consideration of the relationship between human rights and the social determinants of health is critical to strengthening accountability and governance mechanisms.

Finally, we recommend some practical steps to facilitate greater consideration of the place of paradigms in research on human rights and social determinants of health. As researchers when reporting on research on SDOH and HR, we can outline, as in this paper, the paradigm perspectives that influenced our research and related assumptions about the knowledge that we have constructed and evaluated. As practitioners, we can have conversations in our work with communities and other stakeholders about how we understand knowledge, the role of different types of evidence and ways of theorizing explanations and evaluating their practical adequacy. We cannot and should not assume that our views about these matters are shared by others. However, as Huber and Morreale [ 42 ] observe about interdisciplinary encounters

growth in knowledge also comes at the borders of disciplinary imagination....It is in this borderland that scholars from different disciplinary cultures come to trade their wares – insights, ideas and findings – even though the meanings and methods behind them may vary considerably (p. 1) .

Availability of data and materials

Abbreviations.

Critical realism

Health Impact Assessment

Human rights

Social Determinants of Health

Universal Health Care

United Nations

Vermont Workers’ Centre

World Health Organisation

Rights UNCoH. Human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises resolution 2005/69 (20 April 2005) Para 1(d). In. Geneva: Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights; 2005.

Google Scholar

Hunt P. Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Report of the Special Rapporteur, Paul Hunt, submitted in accordance with commission resolution 2002/31. UN Doc. E/CN.4/2003/58. (Februuary 13 2003) paras 82-85.

ICESCT. Concluding Observations on the United Kingdom, UN Doc E/C.12/1/Add. 19 (4th December 1997) para 33.

Chapman AR. Evaluating the health-related targets in the sustainable development goals from a human rights perspective. The International Journal of Human Rights. 2017;21(8):1098–113.

Article Google Scholar

Chapman A. The social determinants of health, health equity, and human rights. Health and Human Rights. 2010;12(2):17–30.

PubMed Google Scholar

Hunt P. Missed opportunities: Human rights and the Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Global Health Promotion . 2009;(Supp 1):36–41.

Schrecker T, Chapman AR, Labonté R, De Vogli R. Advancing health equity in the global marketplace: how human rights can help. Soc Sci Med. 2010;71(8):1520–6.

Rasanathan K, Norenhag J, Valentine N. Realizing human rights-based approaches for action on the social determinants of health. Health and Human Rights. 2010: 12 (2).

Price L. Wellbeing research and policy in the U.K.: questionable science likely to entrench inequality. Journal of Critical Realism. 2017;16(5):451–67.

Price L. Critical realist versus mainstream Interdisciplinarity. Journal of Critical Realism. 2014;13(1):52–76.

Bhaskar R, Danermark B. Metatheory, interdisciplinarity and disability research: a critical realist perspective. Scand J Disabil Res. 2006;8(4):278–97.

Carter S, Little M. Justifying knowledge, justifying method, taking action: epistemologies, methodologies, and methods in qualitative research. Qual Health Res. 2007;17(10):1316–28.

MacNaughton G, Haigh F, Mcgill M, Koutsioumpas K, Sprague C. The impact of human rights on universalizing health Care in Vermont, USA. Health and Human Rights Journal . 2015;17(2):83–95.

Invernizzi-Accetti C. Reconciling legal positivism and human rights: Hans Kelsen's argument from relativism. Journal of Human Rights. 2018;17(2):215–28.

Guba E, Lincoln Y. Fourth generation evaluation. California and London: Sage Publications; 1989.

The SAGE. Handbook of the philosophy of social sciences. In London. 2011.

Coleman JL, Himma KE. In: Shapiro SJ, editor. the Oxford handbook of jurisprudence and philosophy of law. Oxford: OUP Oxford; 2012.

Māori health models – Te Whare Tapa Whā [ http://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/populations/maori-health/maori-health-models/maori-health-models-te-whare-tapa-wha ].

Sayer A. Realism and social science. London: Sage; 2000.

Danermark B, Ekstrom L, Jakobsen L, Karlsson JC. Explaining society: critical realism and the social sciences. London and New York: Routledge; 2002.

Bhaskar R. A realist theory of science. New York: Routledge; 2008.

Harris P, Sainsbury P, Kemp L. The fit between health impact assessment and public policy: practice meets theory. Soc Sci Med. 2014;108:46–53.

Clark AM. What are the components of complex interventions in healthcare? Theorizing approaches to parts, powers and the whole intervention. Soc Sci Med. 2013;93:185–93.

Scambler G, Scambler S. Theorizing health inequalities: the untapped potential of dialectical critical realism. Soc Theory Health. 2015;13(3–4):340–54.

Danermark B. Interdisciplinary research and critical realism. The example of disability research. Journal of Critical Realism. 2002:5.

Pawson R. The science of evaluation: a realist manifesto. London: Sage; 2013.

Book Google Scholar

Baum F, Delany-Crowe T, MacDougall C, van Eyk H, Lawless A, Williams C, Marmot M. To what extent can the activities of the south Australian health in all policies initiative be linked to population health outcomes using a program theory-based evaluation? BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):88.

Jagosh J, Bush PL, Salsberg J, Macaulay AC, Greenhalgh T, Wong G, Cargo M, Green LW, Herbert CP, Pluye P. A realist evaluation of community-based participatory research: partnership synergy, trust building and related ripple effects. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):725.

Kramer D, Harting J, Kunst AE. Understanding the impact of area-based interventions on area safety in deprived areas: realist evaluation of a neighbour nuisance intervention in Arnhem, the Netherlands. BMC Public Health. 2016;16(1):291.

Sayer A. Method in social science: a realist approach (2nd Ed). Abingdon: Routledge; 1992.

Forbes A, Wainwright SP. On the methodological, theoretical and philosophical context of health inequalities research: a critique. Soc Sci Med. 2001;53(6):801–16.

Article CAS Google Scholar

Scott-Samuel A, O'Keefe E. Health impact assessment, human rights and global public policy: a critical appraisal. Bull World Health Organ. 2007;85(3):212–7.

Bhaskar R, Frank C, Hoyer KG, Naess P. In: Parker J, editor. Interdisciplinarity and climate change: transforming knowledge and practice for our global future. London and New York: Routledge; 2010.

Chapter Google Scholar

Alderson P. The politics of childhoods real and imagined volume 2: practical application of critical realism to childhood studies. London and New York: Routledge; 2016.

Bhaskar R. Dialectic: the pulse of freedom. New York: Routledge; 2008.

Alderson P. International human rights, citizenship education, and critical realism. Lond Rev Educ. 2016;14(3):3–12.

London L, Schneider H. Globalisation and health inequalities: can a human rights paradigm create space for civil society action? Soc Sci Med. 2012;74(1):6–13.

Tress G, Tress B, Fry G. Clarifying integrative research concepts in landscape ecology. Landscape Ecology . 2005;20(4):479–93.

O'Cathain A, Murphy E, Nicholl J. Multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, or dysfunctional? Team working in mixed-methods research. Qual Health Res. 2008;18(11):1574–85.

Alderson P. Childhoods real and imagined: volume 1: an introduction to critical realism and childhood studies (ontological explorations). London and New York: Routledge; 2013.

Piven FF, Cloward RA. Power repertoires and globalization. Polit Soc. 2000;28(3):413–30.

Huber M, Morreale S. Disciplinary styles in the scholarship of teaching and learning: exploring common ground. American Association for Higher Education and The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching: Washington; 2002.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the research team who contrinuted to the Vermont Case Study and the case study participants.

This manuscript draws on research carried out by FH during her doctoral studies. These studies were funded by an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Postgraduate Scholarship. The case study used within the paper to illustrate key points was partially funded by the World Health Organization.

The funding bodies had no role in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Centre for Health Equity Training, Research & Evaluation (CHETRE), UNSW Sydney, Sydney, Australia

Fiona Haigh

Ingham Institute, Sydney, Australia

Translational Research and Social Innovation Unit (TReSI), Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia

Lynn Kemp & Patricia Bazeley

EdQuest, Hamilton, New Zealand

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

FH developed the draft manuscript. All authors were involved in conceptualising and revising the manuscript. The paper draws FH’s PhD thesis. LK and PB were supervisors of the PhD and NH provided substantial input into the research planning and writing. All authors have read and approved the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fiona Haigh .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

The Vermont Workers Centre case study received Internal Review Board approval number 2015020 from the University of Massachusetts Boston on February 26, 2015.

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Haigh, F., Kemp, L., Bazeley, P. et al. Developing a critical realist informed framework to explain how the human rights and social determinants of health relationship works. BMC Public Health 19 , 1571 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7760-7

Download citation

Received : 04 February 2019

Accepted : 10 October 2019

Published : 27 November 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7760-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Social determinants of health
Health equity
Explanatory model

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

Submission enquiries: [email protected]
General enquiries: [email protected]

Critical Realism
Routledge Studies in Critical Realism
Writing a Proposal
IACR Conferences
Cheryl Frank Memorial Prize
Webinar Recordings

A beginner’s guide to critical realism

30th October 2020

A guest post by Tom Fryer.

A short guide to ontology and epistemology: why everyone should be a critical realist argues that positivism’s search for universal laws is like looking for a Ferrari at your local supermarket, and constructivism’s denial of reality seems pretty close to convincing yourself that you’re taking the dog-lead for a walk rather than the dog. We know critical realism gives the best alternative—but it can be really hard to explain this to new researchers, who might be quite intimidated by all this talk of ‘ontology’ and ‘epistemology’.

That’s why I wrote this short, accessible and open-access guide . And it’s completely free!

The guide is targeted at new PhD researchers and Master’s students, who might be starting to plan and design their projects. I aim to:

Give an accessible account of ontology and epistemology.
Outline the importance of these concepts for research design.
Share a simple framework to navigate this complex field.
Make the case for why everyone should be a critical realist.

As a second year PhD student, I’ve just been through this process of getting to grips with my research and thinking through the importance of my philosophical position. I hope that this experience, alongside some great illustrations (all credit to Joanna Kozak), will help a new generation of researchers to engage with this super important part of their research design.

The guide adopts a very informal and accessible tone, taking readers through some of the most important concepts and ideas. For example, I give a way to remember the difference between ontology and epistemology as:

Ontology sounds like ‘on toe logy’, or the study of what you just dropped on your toe . Now, if you just dropped a hammer on your toe, I guarantee you’re going to be thinking about reality. You’re going to be thinking about real hammers and real pain, in the real world. There’s no way you’re going to be in the mind-frame to ask: “How do I produce knowledge about this hammer?” You’ll be pretty focused on its reality. That’s ontology.
Epistemology sounds a bit like ‘epic stem ology’, or the study of epic stems . Imagine your mate, who is a plant scientist, comes up to you and says: “Hey buddy, look at the epic stem on this plant, how cool”. I’m guessing your first reaction will be: Is that really an epic stem? How does Dave know that’s an epic stem? Why does Dave have some right weird opinions? You can see these are all questions about knowledge, ie epistemology. See the illustration below!

I hope that gives you a quick flavour of the guide, which was very kindly supported by the Bhaskar Memorial Fund.

I’d really love any help and support sharing this guide with new researchers that you might have access to, or anyone else you think would enjoy it. Also, I’m very open to any critiques/improvements – and if anyone is thinking about how to communicate critical realism, I’d love to hear from you.

Tom Fryer is a PhD researcher in higher education at University of Manchester. His research is focussed on developing an alternative approach to graduate outcomes, moving beyond a narrow focus on employment status and graduate salaries. His Twitter handle is @TomFryer4 .

Understanding Causation in Healthcare: An Introduction to Critical Realism

Erica koopmans.

1 School of Health Sciences, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, BC, Canada

Dr. Catharine Schiller

2 School of Nursing, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, BC, Canada

Both healthcare providers and researchers in the health sciences are well rehearsed in asking the question ‘What could be causing this’? and examining beyond the surface of observable symptoms or obvious factors to understand what is really occurring with patients and health services. Critical realism is a philosophical framework that can help in this inquiry as we attempt to make sense of the observable world. The aim of this article is to introduce critical realism and explore how it can help both healthcare providers and health science researchers to better understand causation through the mechanisms that generate events, despite those mechanisms often being unseen. The article reviews foundational concepts and examples framed in the healthcare setting to make the key principles, strengths and limitations of critical realism accessible for those who are just beginning their journey with this approach.

Human health and illness are complex areas of study, and our understanding of them is typically constructed from our direct observations and experiences of events ( Alderson, 2021 ). From what we observe, we try to make sense of, and interpret what we see happening; however, the philosophical stance we take as healthcare providers and researchers will influence our ways of thinking about these findings, and the conclusions we draw in understanding our area of study. Critical realism is a philosophical framework that is well suited to the health sciences to help us make sense of the ‘observable’ world and the ‘real’ world ( Alderson, 2021 ). Critical realism suggests that while we may observe and experience events, they are being generated by independent, often unobservable, but still very real, mechanisms ( O’Mahoney & Vincent, 2014 ). As healthcare providers and researchers, we are well rehearsed in looking beyond the surface of observable symptoms or factors to try and understand what is really occurring with the patients with whom we work, or the conditions and interventions which we study. The aim of this article is to introduce readers to the key tenets of critical realism, explore how it can offer healthcare providers and researchers deeper levels of explanation and understanding of causation, and examine some potential limitations of this approach.

The Case for Critical Realism

Critical realism is not a methodology or even a theory but a way of thinking (philosophical stance), which can inform investigations into our reality ( Archer et al., 2016 ; Oltmann & Boughey, 2012 ). In healthcare, critical realism can help us understand health and illness as processes that are affected by interactions between individuals and their contexts, including the agents and structures present, and help us explain what we see but also what we do not see ( Alderson, 2021 ). In recent years, the use of critical realism by health researchers has increased as they recognize the value it provides for effectively framing, identifying and understanding complex phenomena in the healthcare sector ( Schiller, 2016 ; Sturgiss & Clark, 2020 ). This approach has appeal for healthcare providers and researchers because of its recognition of the complexity of many health interventions, and its focus on explaining what works under specific conditions or contexts ( Williams et al., 2016 ). For example, a healthcare provider may question ‘why, after trying multiple interventions that I anticipated would change the disease trajectory for my patient, am I not seeing those desired changes?’ Using critical realism, we can effectively inquire into and understand more about the unseen mechanisms that have causal influence in the situation and their effect on the patient’s health and illness ( Alderson, 2021 ). Understanding generative mechanisms has the potential to be very meaningful when we design and evaluate new programs and services that are then transposed to another context, as it enables us to understand how and why desired change might be generated instead of just believing that it will or should happen (e.g., the effectiveness of programs or interventions).

Critical realism is also appealing given its application to various research designs and methods for data collection and analysis. This approach has been applied across broad areas of health research including in several mental health focused studies ( Bergin et al., 2008 ; Lauzier-Jobin & Houle, 2021 ; Littlejohn, 2003 ; Martin, 2019 ; Sims-Schouten & Riley, 2018 ); rural health ( Reid, 2019 ); as a framework for understanding smoking and tobacco control in South Africa ( Oladele et al., 2013 ); for designing an integrated care initiative for vulnerable families in Australia ( Eastwood et al., 2019 ); and for explaining the relationship between human rights and social determinants of health ( Haigh et al., 2019 ).

Foundational Concepts of Critical Realism

Critical realism emerged as a philosophical approach in the 1970s and 1980s, led by the work of Roy Bhaskar ( Bhaskar, 1998 , 2008 ) and built further by scholars such as Margaret Archer, Dave Elder-Vass, Philip Gorski, Tony Lawson and Andrew Sayer. It was introduced as an alternative philosophical framework to the positivist and interpretivist approaches being used in the natural and social sciences ( Fletcher, 2017 ; Williams, 2003 ). To appreciate the value of critical realism it is important to understand how it compares to other key philosophical positions used in research and consider what it can offer that these other ways of thinking do not.

A Focus on Ontology

Critical realism’s focus on ontology or more simply, what is real and independent of thought, awareness or knowledge of existence by humans, distinguishes it from other metatheoretical positions ( Alderson, 2021 ). Bhaskar critiqued positivist and interpretivist philosophical frameworks because of their tendency to conflate what the world ‘is’ ( ontology ) with our experiences of it ( epistemology ) ( Oltmann & Boughey, 2012 ; Reid, 2019 ). This is referred to as the epistemic fallacy. Positivist research is what you might think of as your ‘typical’ science experiment that uses research methods to test, observe, capture, compare and evaluate data ( Hartwig, 2015 ). Positivism aims to identify universal laws in an objective way ( Fryer, 2020 ). Those who use this approach consider that there is an independent, factual reality that can be discovered ( Alderson, 2021 ). Unlike positivism, which involves searching for laws that can be generalized, interpretivist and constructivist approaches see knowledge production as fallible and theory-dependent and they tend to focus more on discourse, meaning and experiences of people ( Fryer, 2020 ). The focus is on interpreting or constructing people’s experiences rather than discovering the actual reality which they claim is subjective to the individual ( Alderson, 2021 ). Bhaskar argued positivist and interpretivist frameworks either limit ‘reality’ to what can be empirically studied and identified as universal laws (positivism), or view reality as entirely constructed through human discourse or experiences (interpretivism and constructivism) ( Fletcher, 2017 ). Bhaskar criticized that research being pursued from these philosophical stances was based only on what could be observed or experienced ( Clark et al., 2008 ). While observations and experiences might make us more confident about what exists, or what might be ‘real’, critical realists note that existence itself is not dependent on such observations ( Haigh et al., 2019 ). For example, people have the right to health even when they are not aware they hold that right or may not have experienced it ( Haigh et al., 2019 ). Much of the justification for using critical realism rests on the integrity of the epistemic fallacy. Critical realists need to accept this as a limitation of the framework since, when distinguishing between ontological and epistemic claims, they cannot move outside their own experiences to ‘prove’ that those distinguishing features actually exist. Positivist and interpretivist approaches do not attract the same corresponding critique as they argue that all knowledge is either objectively observed through deductive reasoning, where they look for general patterns and rules (positivism), or subjectively experienced and inductively analysed (interpretivism).

Intransitive and Transitive Dimensions of Knowledge

Critical realism assumes the existence of an objective world, where mechanisms and structures function as intransitive objects, meaning they exist and act independently with powers and properties that are independent of humans but are still able to be investigated ( Hartwig, 2015 ; Schiller, 2016 ). In contrast, knowledge is considered socially produced and transitive , meaning it is subjective; because knowledge is subjective, our understanding of phenomena can and will constantly change ( Haigh et al., 2019 ; Vincent & O’Mahoney, 2018 ). Critical realists argue that we cannot just observe the world and produce knowledge about universal laws as positivists claim, without acknowledging that our beliefs, values and understanding are socially produced and changeable, meaning that knowledge is intrinsically fallible and relative. Critical realists are trying to approximate the truth of reality or the world, while remaining cognizant that all knowledge developed is fallible ( Schiller, 2016 ). Critical realism combines observation and interpretation in a search for causation and allows for an understanding of the structural forces or mechanisms that influence our lives and generate outcomes. However, it is noted that the validity of explanation in critical realism rests upon these ontological presuppositions and we once again must assume that those presuppositions are both valid and correct.

Stratified Reality

Critical realism suggests that reality is stratified and consists of three domains: empirical, actual and real ( Fletcher, 2017 ). These strata can be more simply considered as experiences, events and causal mechanisms. The empirical layer captures our experiences, senses, feelings and observations. The actual refers to the events or phenomena that happen but may or may not be observed by humans. Sayer discusses that, while observability can provide confidence about what we think exists, existence itself is not dependent upon it ( Sayer, 2000 ). The final layer is the real . Critical realism claims that real, but typically unseen, forces precede and generate events; these are referred to as causal mechanisms or generative mechanisms ( Alderson, 2021 ; Hartwig, 2015 ) . Both positivism and interpretivism acknowledge the empirical level of trying to understand and analyse reality. Positivism also recognizes the actual level by acknowledging that the world does exist independently of our thoughts about that world. However, critical realism remains unique in adding the third level of real, yet typically unseen causal influences or mechanisms ( Alderson, 2021 ). To explain why events, effects or outcomes occur, critical realists describe that we need to move beyond the surface of experienced and observable factors to understand what is happening underneath, at the real level ( Clark et al., 2008 ).

Alderson (2021) supplies a helpful example, adapted here, using the condition of Type I insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) to demonstrate stratified reality ( Table 1 ). To begin, you are working as a healthcare provider and a patient presents to your office describing frequent occurrences of hyperactivity as well as feelings of being weak or faint. This is experienced by that person at the empirical level. You may ask additional questions to further understand their symptoms and, as a result of this information, decide to conduct a blood glucose test. You observe from the blood test results that they have irregular blood sugar levels. The actual event that is happening is the rise and fall of blood sugar levels, but this does not explain why this is happening or what is generating this event. There could be many reasons why this individual has irregular blood sugar levels. It is not until you examine further and consider what could be causing those irregular levels that you identify that this individual’s pancreas is not secreting insulin, the hormone which converts sugar into energy. While the patient may not be aware of what their pancreas is (or is not) doing, this does not change the fact that the pancreas is indeed present and its failure to secrete insulin is causing changes to the patient’s blood sugar levels. Alderson (2021) ends this simplified life sciences example here to show how outcomes can only be understood if we dive into the context and mechanisms that generate the events we observe. Yet, we can effectively take this inquiry significantly further by using critical realism to explore why the pancreas is not secreting insulin. Existing research informs us that, in such situations, something will be causing the body’s immune system (which under normal conditions fight harmful bacteria and viruses) to mistakenly destroy insulin secreting beta cells of the islets of Langerhans in the pancreas ( Leslie & Elliott, 1994 ; Lernmark & Alshiekh, 2016 ; Moini, 2019 ). Is it genetics? Is it exposure to other viruses? Is it environmental factors? What are the hidden but necessary preconditions for IDDM? Using a critical realist lens of inquiry, we may be able to better understand what is generating this outcome of irregular blood sugar levels and under what conditions this outcome will be the result.

Example of Stratified Reality Using Endocrinology and Diabetes in the Life and Social Sciences. Adapted from P. Alderson (2021) .

We can also apply this stratified reality to a social sciences example where the views and experiences of patients with IDDM, their families and their healthcare providers are observed and understood at the empirical level by asking patients about their experiences receiving health services for their condition. We could also observe their daily lives, document the number of people affected, the services accessed and the cost of care incurred to identify events associated with IDDM. However, to deeply understand events, and the ways that IDDM may be influenced by structures such as class, ethnicity, gender or income, we need to consider the real level, where unseen causal mechanisms associated with structural entities and agency are at work.

Causal Mechanisms

As introduced above, critical realists aim to develop and provide ever-deeper levels of explanation and understanding of causal or generative mechanisms and how they work ( Bergin et al., 2008 ). A key question in critical realism is ‘for this to occur, what does the world (or the body system) need to be like?’ ( Alderson, 2021 ). Questions of inquiry include the following: How is the effect being caused? What triggers them? What inhibits them? ( Connelly, 2001 ). These questions ring true as both healthcare providers and researchers. While it is important to know about a patient’s experience and the actual phenomenon that is happening, we want to find and understand the mechanisms that are producing a given effect, event or outcome (or why those mechanisms are interacting in such a way that a given event does not happen). This contrasts the thinking of positivists who look for cause and effect relationships using lawful patterns of thinking and interpretivist approaches who do not view causality as linear but rather as meaning constructed from human activity ( Bergin et al., 2008 ).

Critical realism acknowledges that the relationship between mechanisms and events, despite initial appearances, is not as simple as ‘cause and effect’ ( Oltmann & Boughey, 2012 ) and it is not necessarily linear either (cannot be inferred from a regular sequence of events) ( Oladele et al., 2013 ). Critical realism accepts the possibility of complex causality, meaning that generative mechanisms interact in different ways and will not always play out the same as actual events or previously observed empirical experiences ( Angus & Clark, 2012 ). Sayer (2000) provides a useful description of a critical realist view of causality:

What causes something to happen has nothing to do with the number of times we have observed it happening. Explanation depends instead on identifying causal mechanisms and how they work, and discovering if they have been activated and under what conditions (p. 14)

Therefore, for critical realists it is neither the experience nor the event itself that is the most important to identify and understand, but rather how the mechanisms are coming together in the right number, combination, time and context required to generate an outcome ( Oladele et al., 2013 ; Schiller, 2016 ). Critical realism also critiques the idea that only things that are present exist ( Haigh et al., 2019 ). Consider, for example, access to health care; when access is not present, the lack of access to health care itself may generate unmet health needs as outcomes ( Haigh et al., 2019 ). Critical realists argue that reality, specifically social reality, is produced and changed by these generative mechanisms that are activated or not activated at any given time ( Connelly, 2000 ). It is possible for mechanisms to exist but not generate an effect or to generate a new, different or unexpected effect ( Oltmann & Boughey, 2012 ). Mechanisms can therefore be enabling or constraining depending on the context ( Oltmann & Boughey, 2012 ). As critical realists, we cannot assume that they will have a particular effect but rather that their interactions will result in a tendency for an effect to occur or not occur ( Oltmann & Boughey, 2012 ). When we conduct research using critical realism then, we are looking to identify those relatively enduring tendencies or repetitions (demi regs or demi regularities) ( Hartwig, 2015 ) .

Critics of critical realism may argue that this approach to causality does not avoid the problem of induction at the level of the empirical but instead just transfers it to the level of the real. Critical realists are looking to uncover the foundational unchanging, intransitive, generative mechanisms in which to ground claims about why an event will probably happen in future if these mechanisms are present. Some will question why causal mechanisms (the real) are a better candidate for this than observations or experiences (empirical)? In other words, why is there any more reason to think that these enduring tendencies are more reliable just because they exist ‘beneath’ the empirical where it is experienced. Critiques such as these need to be considered when choosing the critical realism approach over other philosophical frameworks.

An Open System

While we may try to create a closed system in which we can conduct an experiment, control for confounding factors, and yield universal laws about interaction between outcomes and their causes, the ‘real world’ is inevitably an open system. Patients, healthcare providers and the healthcare systems in which they exist and interact are complex and unpredictable, entangled in social contexts, behaviours and relationships which cannot be neatly classified into separate variables ( Alderson, 2021 ). It is challenging to work in the social realm because people cannot easily be placed in the controlled environments considered necessary to truly attribute an effect or event to a cause ( Oltmann & Boughey, 2012 ). For example, if you read in a recent research article that a new behaviour change intervention has been successful in reducing cardiovascular disease risk in a randomized control trial, you may not see the same result when you try to implement this intervention in your practice. Interventions, polices, practice guidelines and programs are frequently transposed to another context and expected to work as effectively as they worked in the context in which they were first developed or tested ( Oladele et al., 2013 ). Critical realism recognizes the difficulties that are inherent in designing social science research and helps us to understand deterministic patterns of activity ( Schiller, 2016 ). It acknowledges that there is a causal network of interacting forces counteracting or reinforcing each other and that outcomes depend upon the conditions in which these mechanisms will operate ( Schiller, 2016 ). There is demonstrable value then, in identifying causal mechanisms and searching for relatively enduring tendencies or repetitions to guide us in explaining how they work, if they have been activated, and under what conditions their interactions might produce outcomes.

Agency and Structure

In using a critical realist framework, we also need to consider agency and structure. Bhaskar (2014) and Archer (1995) explain agency and structure as separate yet interdependent entities in that neither can be ‘reduced to, explained in terms of, or reconstructed from the other. There is an ontological hiatus between society and people, as well as a mode of connection’ ( Bhaskar, 2014 , p. 37). Their writings on agency and structure are the basis for current theorists/practitioners to apply and adapt within a healthcare context. In the context of healthcare, agents are providers and users of health services. This includes (but is not limited to) patients, their family members and support system, healthcare providers and staff, administrators and policy makers. In experimental conditions it is typically implied that each agent involved has free will, choice or agency; in other words, they can act independently and make free choices. However, in the real world, human agency is constrained by structures, other agents and resources ( Alderson, 2015 ). As Fryer (2020) frankly describes it, people do not just wander around, acting freely and doing whatever they want. Alternatively, if they do behave in this way, they do not usually get away with it for long. The world has social structures within which we live and, due to this, we will not often make completely individual decisions that are entirely unaffected by external influence.

Structures are powerful, objective and enduring entities that exist in and through human social relationships ( Alderson, 2021 ). Examples of these social structures include social class, gender and race. While these structures are not typically visible (although manifestations of them might be), nor are they tangible in and of themselves, they are no less real than the law of gravity ( Reid, 2019 ). Agents do not individually construct structures, but they will reproduce, resist, change or work within them, either through direct interaction with these structures or simply via the agent’s movement through the world ( Alderson, 2021 ). Structures would not continue to exist without agents continuing to reproduce and transform them ( Martin, 2019 ). Further, agents will each have their own reasons, motives, decisions, hopes and intentions (conscious and unconscious) brought to bear on the influence they wield and the choices they make; these can then be very real causal influences with effects and outcomes generated through the actions they produce, maintain and transform ( Alderson, 2021 ; Connelly, 2000 ). If we are to think as critical realists, we need to be aware of our own histories and motives and how they might be affecting our experiences and observations, as well as the way in which we are interpreting the experiences and observations of others ( Oltmann & Boughey, 2012 ), such as patients or coworkers. We should also consider how the social histories of patients or coworkers may be affecting their own experiences and observations ( Oltmann & Boughey, 2012 ). If we persist in the belief that everyone has free will or choice, for example the agency to rise above difficult life circumstances such as poverty, abuse or discrimination, then this places the power of agency above the power of structures. It implies that agency is a single overriding power instead of acknowledging the variety and complexity of the multiple powers that will exist in an open system ( Alderson, 2015 ). While the power of social structures is not absolute, it is immense and though some individuals may be able to overcome these powers, others may not for a variety of reasons ( Alderson, 2015 ). It is therefore vital, when conducting social research in the realm of health sciences, to pay attention to and acknowledge these complex agency-structure relationships and interactions as much as possible. If we only look at agency, we fail to consider the impact of structures and what constraints they may have on how and why someone acts in a particular way ( Martin, 2019 ). Conversely, if we only explore structures, we assume individuals are only influenced by these constraints and have no agency or influence ( Martin, 2019 ).

Next Steps for Advancing Your Practice

This article attempted to make the key principles of critical realism accessible for those who are just beginning their journey with this approach. It is a high-level introduction to critical realist concepts and supplied some examples of how critical realism can be helpful in health research, health practice inquiry, and interpretation of findings and observations. There are many more comprehensive resources available to support continued learning on this subject. While readings on philosophy can often feel dense and complex, Fryer’s (2020) A Short Guide to Ontology and Epistemology (Why Everyone Should Be a Critical Realist) , makes it easy to ‘wrap one’s head around’ some difficult concepts. Fryer navigates the basics of ontology and epistemology and reviews different philosophical positions through entertaining and easy to understand examples. For a user-friendly and detailed expansion on critical realism and its application for health research, Alderson’s (2021) book Critical Realism for Health and Illness Research: A Practical Introduction is a particularly excellent guide . Those interested in clarifying concepts and connecting critical realist theory and methodology may wish to read Danermark, Ekstrom and Karlsson’s (2019) recently revised Explaining Society: Critical Realism in the Social Sciences which includes illustrative examples of recent research, and Edwards et al. (2014) Studying organizations using critical realism: A practical guide. Lastly, if you are interested to dive into more complex reading in this area, Critical Realism: Essential Readings contains key works of many thought leaders in the field, including Archer, Bhaskar and Collier ( Archer et al., 2013 ).

Health and illness affect every aspect of our lives and are influenced by many factors, including the context, policies, behaviours and beliefs that surround us ( Alderson, 2021 ). Patients with the same diagnosis can differ in their presentation of symptoms and how they respond to interventions. Interventions developed and studied with demonstrated efficacy in one context may fail to result in the same outcomes in another context. This article provided an overview of foundational critical realist concepts using examples from the healthcare setting. The aim was to support healthcare providers and health science researchers to consider how critical realism can help them understand causation at a deeper level and thus support more effective change, while also noting the assumptions and critiques they may encounter when using this approach. Critical realism offers many opportunities as described, including an affinity with the way many of us in healthcare see the world fitting together ( O’Mahoney & Vincent, 2014 ). While we may observe what we think are universal laws, and experience actual events which shape our stories and guide our thinking, critical realism helps us avoid conflating what is real with our experiences. It can assist us in understanding the open system of our social world where relationship between mechanisms and events is not as simple as ‘cause and effect’, and where context, structures, and agents can interact in diverse ways to generate or constrain effects, events or outcomes. This way of thinking can help us examine beyond the surface of observable symptoms or obvious factors to understand what is really happening with patients and health services. As we attempt to make sense of the ‘real’ world and the ‘observable’ world, critical realism is a way of approaching healthcare issues that can allow us to be more successful in this endeavour.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding: The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethical Statement: Our study did not require a research ethics board approval because it did not contain human or animal trials.

Erica Koopmans https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2001-7128

Catharine Schiller https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3656-2171

Search Menu
Browse content in Arts and Humanities
Browse content in Archaeology
Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
Archaeology by Region
Archaeology of Religion
Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
Biblical Archaeology
Contemporary and Public Archaeology
Environmental Archaeology
Historical Archaeology
History and Theory of Archaeology
Industrial Archaeology
Landscape Archaeology
Mortuary Archaeology
Prehistoric Archaeology
Underwater Archaeology
Urban Archaeology
Zooarchaeology
Browse content in Architecture
Architectural Structure and Design
History of Architecture
Residential and Domestic Buildings
Theory of Architecture
Browse content in Art
Art Subjects and Themes
History of Art
Industrial and Commercial Art
Theory of Art
Biographical Studies
Byzantine Studies
Browse content in Classical Studies
Classical Literature
Classical Reception
Classical History
Classical Philosophy
Classical Mythology
Classical Art and Architecture
Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
Greek and Roman Papyrology
Greek and Roman Archaeology
Greek and Roman Epigraphy
Greek and Roman Law
Late Antiquity
Religion in the Ancient World
Digital Humanities
Browse content in History
Colonialism and Imperialism
Diplomatic History
Environmental History
Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
Historical Geography
History by Period
History of Emotions
History of Agriculture
History of Education
History of Gender and Sexuality
Industrial History
Intellectual History
International History
Labour History
Legal and Constitutional History
Local and Family History
Maritime History
Military History
National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
Oral History
Political History
Public History
Regional and National History
Revolutions and Rebellions
Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
Social and Cultural History
Theory, Methods, and Historiography
Urban History
World History
Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
Language Learning (Specific Skills)
Language Teaching Theory and Methods
Browse content in Linguistics
Applied Linguistics
Cognitive Linguistics
Computational Linguistics
Forensic Linguistics
Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
History of English
Language Evolution
Language Reference
Language Variation
Language Families
Language Acquisition
Lexicography
Linguistic Anthropology
Linguistic Theories
Linguistic Typology
Phonetics and Phonology
Psycholinguistics
Sociolinguistics
Translation and Interpretation
Writing Systems
Browse content in Literature
Bibliography
Children's Literature Studies
Literary Studies (Romanticism)
Literary Studies (American)
Literary Studies (Modernism)
Literary Studies (Asian)
Literary Studies (European)
Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
Literary Studies - World
Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
Literary Studies (19th Century)
Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
Literary Studies (African American Literature)
Literary Studies (British and Irish)
Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
Literary Studies (History of the Book)
Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
Literary Studies (War Literature)
Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
Mythology and Folklore
Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
Browse content in Media Studies
Browse content in Music
Applied Music
Dance and Music
Ethics in Music
Ethnomusicology
Gender and Sexuality in Music
Medicine and Music
Music Cultures
Music and Media
Music and Culture
Music and Religion
Music Education and Pedagogy
Music Theory and Analysis
Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
Musicology and Music History
Performance Practice and Studies
Race and Ethnicity in Music
Sound Studies
Browse content in Performing Arts
Browse content in Philosophy
Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
Epistemology
Feminist Philosophy
History of Western Philosophy
Metaphysics
Moral Philosophy
Non-Western Philosophy
Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Mind
Philosophy of Perception
Philosophy of Action
Philosophy of Law
Philosophy of Religion
Philosophy of Science
Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
Practical Ethics
Social and Political Philosophy
Browse content in Religion
Biblical Studies
Christianity
East Asian Religions
History of Religion
Judaism and Jewish Studies
Qumran Studies
Religion and Education
Religion and Health
Religion and Politics
Religion and Science
Religion and Law
Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
Religious Studies
Browse content in Society and Culture
Cookery, Food, and Drink
Cultural Studies
Customs and Traditions
Ethical Issues and Debates
Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
Sports and Outdoor Recreation
Technology and Society
Travel and Holiday
Visual Culture
Browse content in Law
Arbitration
Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
Commercial Law
Company Law
Browse content in Comparative Law
Systems of Law
Competition Law
Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
Government Powers
Judicial Review
Local Government Law
Military and Defence Law
Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
Construction Law
Contract Law
Browse content in Criminal Law
Criminal Procedure
Criminal Evidence Law
Sentencing and Punishment
Employment and Labour Law
Environment and Energy Law
Browse content in Financial Law
Banking Law
Insolvency Law
History of Law
Human Rights and Immigration
Intellectual Property Law
Browse content in International Law
Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
Public International Law
IT and Communications Law
Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
Law and Society
Law and Politics
Browse content in Legal System and Practice
Courts and Procedure
Legal Skills and Practice
Primary Sources of Law
Regulation of Legal Profession
Medical and Healthcare Law
Browse content in Policing
Criminal Investigation and Detection
Police and Security Services
Police Procedure and Law
Police Regional Planning
Browse content in Property Law
Personal Property Law
Study and Revision
Terrorism and National Security Law
Browse content in Trusts Law
Wills and Probate or Succession
Browse content in Medicine and Health
Browse content in Allied Health Professions
Arts Therapies
Clinical Science
Dietetics and Nutrition
Occupational Therapy
Operating Department Practice
Physiotherapy
Radiography
Speech and Language Therapy
Browse content in Anaesthetics
General Anaesthesia
Neuroanaesthesia
Clinical Neuroscience
Browse content in Clinical Medicine
Acute Medicine
Cardiovascular Medicine
Clinical Genetics
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Dermatology
Endocrinology and Diabetes
Gastroenterology
Genito-urinary Medicine
Geriatric Medicine
Infectious Diseases
Medical Toxicology
Medical Oncology
Pain Medicine
Palliative Medicine
Rehabilitation Medicine
Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
Rheumatology
Sleep Medicine
Sports and Exercise Medicine
Community Medical Services
Critical Care
Emergency Medicine
Forensic Medicine
Haematology
History of Medicine
Browse content in Medical Skills
Clinical Skills
Communication Skills
Nursing Skills
Surgical Skills
Medical Ethics
Browse content in Medical Dentistry
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Paediatric Dentistry
Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
Surgical Dentistry
Medical Statistics and Methodology
Browse content in Neurology
Clinical Neurophysiology
Neuropathology
Nursing Studies
Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Gynaecology
Occupational Medicine
Ophthalmology
Otolaryngology (ENT)
Browse content in Paediatrics
Neonatology
Browse content in Pathology
Chemical Pathology
Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
Histopathology
Medical Microbiology and Virology
Patient Education and Information
Browse content in Pharmacology
Psychopharmacology
Browse content in Popular Health
Caring for Others
Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Self-help and Personal Development
Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
Cell Biology
Molecular Biology and Genetics
Reproduction, Growth and Development
Primary Care
Professional Development in Medicine
Browse content in Psychiatry
Addiction Medicine
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
Forensic Psychiatry
Learning Disabilities
Old Age Psychiatry
Psychotherapy
Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
Epidemiology
Public Health
Browse content in Radiology
Clinical Radiology
Interventional Radiology
Nuclear Medicine
Radiation Oncology
Reproductive Medicine
Browse content in Surgery
Cardiothoracic Surgery
Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
General Surgery
Neurosurgery
Paediatric Surgery
Peri-operative Care
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Surgical Oncology
Transplant Surgery
Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
Vascular Surgery
Browse content in Science and Mathematics
Browse content in Biological Sciences
Aquatic Biology
Biochemistry
Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
Developmental Biology
Ecology and Conservation
Evolutionary Biology
Genetics and Genomics
Microbiology
Molecular and Cell Biology
Natural History
Plant Sciences and Forestry
Research Methods in Life Sciences
Structural Biology
Systems Biology
Zoology and Animal Sciences
Browse content in Chemistry
Analytical Chemistry
Computational Chemistry
Crystallography
Environmental Chemistry
Industrial Chemistry
Inorganic Chemistry
Materials Chemistry
Medicinal Chemistry
Mineralogy and Gems
Organic Chemistry
Physical Chemistry
Polymer Chemistry
Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
Theoretical Chemistry
Browse content in Computer Science
Artificial Intelligence
Computer Architecture and Logic Design
Game Studies
Human-Computer Interaction
Mathematical Theory of Computation
Programming Languages
Software Engineering
Systems Analysis and Design
Virtual Reality
Browse content in Computing
Business Applications
Computer Games
Computer Security
Computer Networking and Communications
Digital Lifestyle
Graphical and Digital Media Applications
Operating Systems
Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
Atmospheric Sciences
Environmental Geography
Geology and the Lithosphere
Maps and Map-making
Meteorology and Climatology
Oceanography and Hydrology
Palaeontology
Physical Geography and Topography
Regional Geography
Soil Science
Urban Geography
Browse content in Engineering and Technology
Agriculture and Farming
Biological Engineering
Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
Electronics and Communications Engineering
Energy Technology
Engineering (General)
Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
History of Engineering and Technology
Mechanical Engineering and Materials
Technology of Industrial Chemistry
Transport Technology and Trades
Browse content in Environmental Science
Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
Environmental Sustainability
Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
History of Science and Technology
Browse content in Materials Science
Ceramics and Glasses
Composite Materials
Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
Nanotechnology
Browse content in Mathematics
Applied Mathematics
Biomathematics and Statistics
History of Mathematics
Mathematical Education
Mathematical Finance
Mathematical Analysis
Numerical and Computational Mathematics
Probability and Statistics
Pure Mathematics
Browse content in Neuroscience
Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
Development of the Nervous System
Disorders of the Nervous System
History of Neuroscience
Invertebrate Neurobiology
Molecular and Cellular Systems
Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
Neuroscientific Techniques
Sensory and Motor Systems
Browse content in Physics
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
Biological and Medical Physics
Classical Mechanics
Computational Physics
Condensed Matter Physics
Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
History of Physics
Mathematical and Statistical Physics
Measurement Science
Nuclear Physics
Particles and Fields
Plasma Physics
Quantum Physics
Relativity and Gravitation
Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
Browse content in Psychology
Affective Sciences
Clinical Psychology
Cognitive Psychology
Cognitive Neuroscience
Criminal and Forensic Psychology
Developmental Psychology
Educational Psychology
Evolutionary Psychology
Health Psychology
History and Systems in Psychology
Music Psychology
Neuropsychology
Organizational Psychology
Psychological Assessment and Testing
Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
Psychology Professional Development and Training
Research Methods in Psychology
Social Psychology
Browse content in Social Sciences
Browse content in Anthropology
Anthropology of Religion
Human Evolution
Medical Anthropology
Physical Anthropology
Regional Anthropology
Social and Cultural Anthropology
Theory and Practice of Anthropology
Browse content in Business and Management
Business Ethics
Business History
Business Strategy
Business and Technology
Business and Government
Business and the Environment
Comparative Management
Corporate Governance
Corporate Social Responsibility
Entrepreneurship
Health Management
Human Resource Management
Industrial and Employment Relations
Industry Studies
Information and Communication Technologies
International Business
Knowledge Management
Management and Management Techniques
Operations Management
Organizational Theory and Behaviour
Pensions and Pension Management
Public and Nonprofit Management
Strategic Management
Supply Chain Management
Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
Criminal Justice
Criminology
Forms of Crime
International and Comparative Criminology
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
Development Studies
Browse content in Economics
Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
Asian Economics
Behavioural Finance
Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
Economic History
Economic Methodology
Economic Systems
Economic Development and Growth
Financial Markets
Financial Institutions and Services
General Economics and Teaching
Health, Education, and Welfare
History of Economic Thought
International Economics
Labour and Demographic Economics
Law and Economics
Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
Microeconomics
Public Economics
Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
Welfare Economics
Browse content in Education
Adult Education and Continuous Learning
Care and Counselling of Students
Early Childhood and Elementary Education
Educational Equipment and Technology
Educational Strategies and Policy
Higher and Further Education
Organization and Management of Education
Philosophy and Theory of Education
Schools Studies
Secondary Education
Teaching of a Specific Subject
Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
Teaching Skills and Techniques
Browse content in Environment
Applied Ecology (Social Science)
Climate Change
Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
Natural Disasters (Environment)
Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
Browse content in Human Geography
Cultural Geography
Economic Geography
Political Geography
Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
Communication Studies
Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
Browse content in Politics
African Politics
Asian Politics
Chinese Politics
Comparative Politics
Conflict Politics
Elections and Electoral Studies
Environmental Politics
European Union
Foreign Policy
Gender and Politics
Human Rights and Politics
Indian Politics
International Relations
International Organization (Politics)
International Political Economy
Irish Politics
Latin American Politics
Middle Eastern Politics
Political Behaviour
Political Economy
Political Institutions
Political Theory
Political Methodology
Political Communication
Political Philosophy
Political Sociology
Politics and Law
Public Policy
Public Administration
Quantitative Political Methodology
Regional Political Studies
Russian Politics
Security Studies
State and Local Government
UK Politics
US Politics
Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
African Studies
Asian Studies
East Asian Studies
Japanese Studies
Latin American Studies
Middle Eastern Studies
Native American Studies
Scottish Studies
Browse content in Research and Information
Research Methods
Browse content in Social Work
Addictions and Substance Misuse
Adoption and Fostering
Care of the Elderly
Child and Adolescent Social Work
Couple and Family Social Work
Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
Emergency Services
Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
International and Global Issues in Social Work
Mental and Behavioural Health
Social Justice and Human Rights
Social Policy and Advocacy
Social Work and Crime and Justice
Social Work Macro Practice
Social Work Practice Settings
Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
Welfare and Benefit Systems
Browse content in Sociology
Childhood Studies
Community Development
Comparative and Historical Sociology
Economic Sociology
Gender and Sexuality
Gerontology and Ageing
Health, Illness, and Medicine
Marriage and the Family
Migration Studies
Occupations, Professions, and Work
Organizations
Population and Demography
Race and Ethnicity
Social Theory
Social Movements and Social Change
Social Research and Statistics
Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
Sociology of Religion
Sociology of Education
Sport and Leisure
Urban and Rural Studies
Browse content in Warfare and Defence
Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
Land Forces and Warfare
Military Administration
Military Life and Institutions
Naval Forces and Warfare
Other Warfare and Defence Issues
Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
Weapons and Equipment

Studying Organizations Using Critical Realism: A Practical Guide

< Previous chapter
Next chapter >

2 Critical Realism, Research Techniques, and Research Designs

Published: March 2014
Cite Icon Cite
Permissions Icon Permissions

After an introduction which suggests the purpose of CR research is to discover the operation of social mechanisms and for this reason researchers are eclectic when it comes to research techniques, it is argued that, nonetheless, a small number of research designs are favoured for CR research. To clarify these the chapter distinguishes two dimensions: one between intensive and extensive research and the other between detachment from and involvement with research subjects. From this a typology of eight usable realist research designs is constructed. To develop these propositions the chapter makes distinctions between four logically distinct research strategies. Preferred detached research designs presented and discussed are: case studies, comparative case analyses, generative institutional analyses, and research using survey and census data. Amongst these, few of which have so far been extensively used by CR researchers, the following are discussed: action research, intensive realist evaluation, barefoot historical research, and extensive realist evaluation.

Signed in as

Institutional accounts.

Google Scholar Indexing
GoogleCrawler [DO NOT DELETE]

Personal account

Sign in with email/username & password
Get email alerts
Save searches
Purchase content
Activate your purchase/trial code
Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with username/password
Recommend to your librarian
Institutional account management
Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Sign in through your institution

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institutionâ€™s website and Oxford Academic.

Click Sign in through your institution.
Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institutionâ€™s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see â€˜Sign in through society siteâ€™ in the sign in pane within a journal:

Click Sign in through society site.
When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Rights and permissions
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

COMMENTS

What is Critical Realism?
Critical Realism (CR) is a branch of philosophy that distinguishes between the 'real' world and the 'observable' world. The 'real' can not be observed and exists independent from human perceptions, theories, and constructions. The world as we know and understand it is constructed from our perspectives and experiences, through what is 'observable'.
Critical Realism and Qualitative Research: An introductory Overview
This chapter introduces a critical realist approach to qualitative research. Critical realist research methods are primarily focused on understanding, rather than merely describing, social reality ...
Full article: Critical realism: an explanatory framework for small
Critical-realist research requires 'an intensive study, ... Finding a definition of social structures that works for an 'outsider' researcher in the field of Education was particularly helpful. The use of Scott's typology for social structures was productive, especially as it highlights the ideas that underpin the activities of a social ...
Critical realism: what you should know and how to apply it
The purpose of this paper is to discuss the critical realism (CR) philosophical viewpoint and how it can be applied in qualitative research. CR is a relatively new and viable philosophical paradigm proposed as an alternative to the more predominant paradigms of positivism, interpretivism and pragmatism. This paper reviews the concept, its ...
Critical realism: what you should know and how to apply it
Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to discuss the critical realism (CR) philosophical viewpoint and how it. can be applied in qualitative research. CR is a relatively new and viable ...
PDF What Is Realism, and Why Should Qualitative Researchers Care?
Realism. Philosophic realism in general is defined by Phillips (1987, p. 205) as "the view that entities exist independently of being perceived, or independently of our theories about them.". Schwandt adds that "scientific realism is the view that theories refer to real features of the world. 'Reality' here refers to whatever it is in ...
Understanding Causation in Healthcare: An Introduction to Critical Realism
Critical realism recognizes the difficulties that are inherent in designing social science research and helps us to understand deterministic patterns of activity (Schiller, 2016). It acknowledges that there is a causal network of interacting forces counteracting or reinforcing each other and that outcomes depend upon the conditions in which ...
Seven key insights from critical realism and their implications for
Critical realism does not offer specific theoretical ideas or simple methodological templates (Lawson, 2004). Instead, critical realist methodology invites us to be careful and reflexive about the relationship between knowledge and evidence generated by our research methods and explicit about our claims and justifications.
PDF Introduction to Critical Realism
o Critical realism (CR) is a philosophy of science offering an alternative methodological approach that sits between subjectivist and objectivist approaches. o CR combines an objectivist ontology with a soft social constructionist epistemology (Elder-Vass, 2012) o It is a family tree of approaches and areas of study, that take as starting ...
Critical Realism in the Social Sciences
Critical realism is a naturalist epistemology, one that is applicable across the sciences and the social sciences. Following the introduction in Chap. 2 of critical realism as an underpinning philosophy, this chapter focuses on its application within the social sciences. Research in the social sciences differs from that in the sciences in several ways and this factor is explored under the ...
Critical Realism as an Underpinning Philosophy
Critical realism is a 'naturalistic' ontology, one that can be applied to research in both the natural and the social sciences and it incorporates a 'stratified' model of reality (Bhaskar, 1975, 1979). It is stratified in two ways.
Critical Realism: A Critical Evaluation
Critical realism represents a broad alliance of social theorists and researchers trying to develop a properly post-positivist social science. Critical realism situates itself as an alternative paradigm both to scientistic forms of positivism concerned with regularities, regression-based variables models, and the quest for law-like forms; and also to the strong interpretivist or postmodern turn ...
Critical realism and qualitative research in psychology
3 Transcendental realism is developed out of a critique of classical empiricism and transcendental idealism (Bhaskar Citation 1975), which (to greatly simplify) gave rise in the 20th Century to logical positivism and interpretivism/social constructivism, respectively.Critical naturalism is developed out of a critique of positivism and interpretivism and seeks to resolve the dualisms prevalent ...
Developing a critical realist informed framework to explain how the
Critical realism (CR) is a relatively new paradigm position. It represents a combination of views that contrast with those associated with traditional positivist and interpretivist positions [19,20,21].An increasing number of public health, and to a lesser extent human rights, scholars are adopting a CR position [e.g] [9, 22,23,24,25].There is also now a large body work in the area of realist ...
The philosophy of critical realism and childhood studies
Abstract. Critical realism is a philosophy of social science that analyses and aims to remedy current problems and gaps. Basic tenets of positivist and quantitative research tend to contradict those of qualitative and interpretive research, and critical realism proposes ways to resolve the contradictions. Vital themes in childhood research that ...
A beginner's guide to critical realism
The guide is targeted at new PhD researchers and Master's students, who might be starting to plan and design their projects. I aim to: Give an accessible account of ontology and epistemology. Outline the importance of these concepts for research design. Share a simple framework to navigate this complex field.
Critical realism (philosophy of the social sciences)
Critical realism is a philosophical approach to understanding science, and in particular social science, initially developed by Roy Bhaskar (1944-2014). It specifically opposes forms of empiricism and positivism by viewing science as concerned with identifying causal mechanisms.In the last decades of the twentieth century it also stood against various forms of postmodernism and ...
Understanding Causation in Healthcare: An Introduction to Critical Realism
Critical realism recognizes the difficulties that are inherent in designing social science research and helps us to understand deterministic patterns of activity (Schiller, 2016). It acknowledges that there is a causal network of interacting forces counteracting or reinforcing each other and that outcomes depend upon the conditions in which ...
Critical Realist Explorations in Methodology
The integration of the researcher-as-intentional-agent with the object of research as a „real‟ thing is what critical realism has been working on for 32 years since this seminal 1975 book. The four modes of reasoning used most in social research are induction, deduction, abduction, and retroduction.
Critical Realism, Research Techniques, and Research Designs
To clarify these the chapter distinguishes two dimensions: one between intensive and extensive research and the other between detachment from and involvement with research subjects. From this a typology of eight usable realist research designs is constructed.
Applying critical realism in qualitative research: methodology meets
Abstract. Critical realism (CR) is a useful philosophical framework for social science; however, little guidance is available on which precise methods - including methods of data collection, coding, and analysis - are best suited to applied CR research.
Operationalising critical realism for case study research
Purpose. Critical realism is an increasingly popular "lens" through which complex events, entities and phenomena can be studied. Yet detailed operationalisations of critical realism are at present relatively scarce. This study's objective here is built on existing debates by developing an open systems model of reality, a basis for designing ...
Full article: Five potentials of critical realism in management and
Method. The five potentials presented in this paper have been synthesized through analysis of 26 critical realism-based MOS studies, which were identified through a search of three research databases (see table 1).In the literature search, the term 'critical realism' was applied in combination with terms beginning with 'organi' - thereby including, among others, organization (with ...
Full article: Critical realism and the ontology of persons*
Critical realism began in a double argument: for ontology, and against the reduction of ontology to, or its dissolution in, epistemology (which I called 'the epistemic fallacy'), committed by Hume and Kant and most of modern philosophy (see Bhaskar Citation 2008a, 36); for a new ontology, characterized by structure, difference and change.

Education Studies

Critical Realism and Science

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Design/methodology/approach

Research limitations/implications

Originality/value

Acknowledgements

Related articles

All feedback is valuable

Join us on our journey

Questions & More Information

Critical Realism as an Underpinning Philosophy

Cite this chapter

Access this chapter

Author information

Rights and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Download citation

Share this chapter

Developing a critical realist informed framework to explain how the human rights and social determinants of health relationship works

Context and case

The concept of a research paradigm

Critical realism research paradigm – key features and relevance to human rights and social determinants of health

Critical Realist methodology

Critical Realist axiology

Critical realism, the social determinants of health and human rights

Theorising an explanatory framework

Availability of data and materials

Acknowledgements

Author information

Contributions

Corresponding author

Ethics declarations

Consent for publication

Additional information

Rights and permissions

About this article

Share this article

BMC Public Health

A beginner’s guide to critical realism

Share this:

Understanding Causation in Healthcare: An Introduction to Critical Realism

Dr. Catharine Schiller

The Case for Critical Realism

Foundational Concepts of Critical Realism

A Focus on Ontology

Intransitive and Transitive Dimensions of Knowledge

Stratified Reality

Causal Mechanisms

An Open System

Agency and Structure

Next Steps for Advancing Your Practice

2 Critical Realism, Research Techniques, and Research Designs

Signed in as

Personal account

Institutional access

IP based access

Sign in through your institution

Society Members

Sign in through society site

Sign in using a personal account

Viewing your signed in accounts

Signed in but can't access content

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

COMMENTS