Abstract
Debate currently exists on the soundness of various research methodologies in the social sciences. In the present paper, this question is addressed in relation to the emerging discipline of occupational science. First, the discipline of occupational science is defined. Next, two competing methodologies--Paradigm 1, Positivistic, and Paradigm 2, Naturalistic--are contrasted. The criteria of genuineness and trustworthiness are proposed as crucial for the evaluation of the soundness of available research methodologies for the extension of occupational science. Next, exemplars of research methodologies that meet these criteria are described. In the conclusion, the role that nonscientific ways of knowing, such as art and literature, may play in the understanding of human occupation is discussed.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
