RES 6013 Module 1 Research Paradigms Comparison Example

Three Ways to Ask Why New Nurses Leave: Comparing Postpositivist, Constructivist and Pragmatic Paradigms for a Study of First-Year Turnover in Rural Georgia Hospitals

Student Name

American College of Education

RES6013: Research Methods

Module 1 Assignment

Instructor Name

October 12, 2026

Introduction

I coordinate the nurse residency program for a system of three small hospitals in south Georgia. Each spring we hire newly licensed nurses from nearby associate and bachelor's programs, and each year several leave before their first anniversary. Kovner et al. (2014), following new nurses across the country in a 10-year panel study, reported that roughly one in six had moved on from their first employer before a year was out. Our rate is higher, and every early departure costs us recruiting, orientation and the experienced nurses who absorb the extra shifts. I want my dissertation to address this problem. Before choosing a design, this paper compares three research paradigms and asks how each would shape a study of first-year turnover.

What a Paradigm Is

A paradigm, in research, bundles a researcher's assumptions about what is real, how anyone can come to know it and which methods suit that knowing. Kivunja and Kuyini (2017) described four elements: ontology, the nature of reality; epistemology, the relationship between the knower and what can be known; methodology, the overall strategy of inquiry; and axiology, the role of values. These beliefs are often unstated, but they shape every later decision, from the wording of a research question to what counts as evidence. Making them explicit at the start helps a researcher choose a design deliberately rather than by habit.

Postpositivism

Postpositivists assume there is a real world apart from the person studying it, though any picture of it will be incomplete. Its researchers seek to reduce bias through careful measurement, control and replication, and they treat findings as probable rather than certain. Applied to first-year turnover, a postpositivist would ask which measurable factors predict leaving. The study might follow every nurse hired across five years, measure variables such as preceptor continuity, unit type, shift, commuting distance and scores on a validated job satisfaction scale and use survival analysis to estimate how each factor changes the risk of departure.

The strength of this approach is that it can tell administrators how much each factor matters and test whether a change, such as assigning a consistent preceptor, is followed by lower turnover. Its weakness for my problem is that it can measure only what I already know to measure. If nurses leave because of something I have not thought to ask about, such as feeling like outsiders in a close-knit small town, the model will miss it.

Constructivism

Constructivism, often called the interpretive paradigm, holds that people construct reality through experience and interaction, so there are multiple realities rather than one. Knowledge is created between researcher and participant, and the researcher's own position is part of the inquiry. A constructivist would ask how new nurses experience their first year in a rural hospital and how those who leave make the decision. The study would rely on long conversations with nurses on both sides of the decision, those who stayed and those who quit, analyzed to understand meanings rather than to count frequencies.

Duchscher (2009), drawing on four qualitative studies across a decade, gave the name transition shock to a new graduate's opening months on the job, marked by anxiety, insecurity and a sense of inadequacy as new graduates meet the gap between school and work. Her work shows what interpretive research can offer: a language for an experience that surveys had measured only in fragments. For my problem, a constructivist study could reveal reasons for leaving that no one on our leadership team has considered. Its limits are that findings from a small number of participants cannot estimate how common each experience is, and administrators who want numbers may find it less persuasive.

Pragmatism

Pragmatism sets aside the debate over the nature of reality and judges research by its usefulness in solving a problem. Kaushik and Walsh (2019) described it as a paradigm that values practical consequences, accepts that knowledge is provisional and lets the research question determine the methods. Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004) argued that pragmatism gives mixed methods research a philosophical home, since it allows researchers to combine numbers and narratives when a question needs both.

A pragmatic study of first-year turnover might begin with interviews to find out why nurses leave, then use those findings to build a survey given to every new nurse, and finally test which survey factors predict departure. Or it might start with records to identify which units lose the most new nurses and then interview nurses on those units. Either way, the design follows the question and the practical need, which in my case is to give our hospitals something they can act on.

A Fourth Option Set Aside

Kivunja and Kuyini (2017) also described a transformative or critical paradigm, which treats research as a way to expose and change unequal power. A critical study of turnover might ask whether new nurses from the local community are treated differently from those recruited from cities, or whether scheduling practices push the least powerful staff out first. I considered this paradigm seriously, since rural hospitals do have strong informal hierarchies. I set it aside because I do not yet have evidence that power and inequity drive our departures, and starting from that assumption could steer the study toward a conclusion. If the interview phase points that way, a critical lens could shape a later study.

Comparing the Three

The paradigms differ most on three points. On reality, postpositivism assumes one reality measured imperfectly, constructivism assumes many realities built through experience and pragmatism treats the question as less important than what works. On the researcher's role, the postpositivist strives for distance, the constructivist acknowledges involvement and the pragmatist accepts whichever stance a method requires. On evidence, postpositivism prefers measurement, constructivism prefers rich description and pragmatism uses both. My position matters here. As the residency coordinator, I know many of the nurses personally, which a postpositivist would treat as a source of bias to control and a constructivist would treat as part of the context to examine openly.

My Choice and Its Reasons

I am choosing pragmatism, with an exploratory sequential mixed methods design in mind. Three reasons support the choice. First, my problem is practical: our hospitals need to know what to change. Second, the existing evidence leaves a gap that a single approach cannot fill. Survey studies of turnover rarely capture rural hospital conditions, and qualitative studies such as Duchscher's describe the experience well but cannot tell my leadership team which factors matter most in our setting. Third, the sequence fits the problem, since interviews can surface reasons I would not have thought to measure, and a survey can then test how widespread they are. The choice carries costs. A mixed methods dissertation takes longer, requires skill in two kinds of analysis and must integrate findings rather than simply report two studies side by side, and those costs will shape my timeline.

Axiology also figures in the choice. I value keeping the nurses we train, and I am not neutral about the outcome. Pragmatism asks me to state that value openly and to guard against it by inviting nurses who left, not only those who stayed, and by asking a faculty peer with no tie to our hospitals to audit my coding.

Conclusion

Each paradigm would produce a different study of why new nurses leave rural hospitals: a predictive model, a portrait of lived experience or a sequence that uses one to inform the other. Pragmatism best fits my problem because it lets the question lead and promises findings our hospitals can use. Module 2 turns this choice into a problem statement and research questions.

References

Duchscher, J. E. B. (2009). Transition shock: The initial stage of role adaptation for newly graduated registered nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 65(5), 1103-1113. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04898.x

Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014

Kaushik, V., & Walsh, C. A. (2019). Pragmatism as a research paradigm and its implications for social work research. Social Sciences, 8(9), Article 255. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8090255

Kivunja, C., & Kuyini, A. B. (2017). Understanding and applying research paradigms in educational contexts. International Journal of Higher Education, 6(5), 26-41. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v6n5p26

Kovner, C. T., Brewer, C. S., Fatehi, F., & Jun, J. (2014). What does nurse turnover rate mean and what is the rate? Policy, Politics, & Nursing Practice, 15(3-4), 64-71. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527154414547953