solved Assignment: Dissecting Two Empirical Research Articles for Epistemological Assumptions All

Assignment: Dissecting Two Empirical Research Articles for Epistemological Assumptions
All researchers wear the lens of an epistemological paradigm when they design and conduct an empirical research study. It may not be explicitly stated, but an underlying research philosophy drives the study. The same will be true of you when you formulate your future doctoral capstone study.
Epistemology is not easy to comprehend. The only way to learn epistemological concepts is to practice applying them. For this Assignment, you will compare how two empirical research articles—one from a logical positivism lens and one from the interpretivism lens—investigate the same topic. For this comparison, the topic and the two articles will be provided for you. Then, using what you learn from your comparison, you will consider how the two lenses influence potential approaches to your own potential doctoral capstone topic.
You are encouraged to use the same topic throughout the course to obtain an array of epistemological and theoretical perspectives on this topic. (Even if you change your mind at the end of the course, this is still a valuable lesson: You may learn that you don’t want to study this topic for your doctoral capstone project!)
To prepare
Review the Walden University pages related to empirical articles and the Epistemology Guide (specifically review Tables 1, 2, and 3) that are listed in the Learning Resources.
Then select one of the topics below, and review the two studies under the topic—one from a logical positivism lens and one from an interpretivism lens:

Topic 1: Social Work Practice in Child Welfare

Logical positivism lens: Julien-Chinn, F. J., Cotter, K. L., Piel, M. H., Geiger, J. M., & Lietz, C. A. (2017). Examining risk, strengths, and functioning of foster families: Implications for strengths-based practice. Journal of Family Social Work, 20(4), 306–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/10522158.2017.1348111
Interpretivism lens: Lietz, C. A., Julien-Chinn, F. J., Geiger, J. M., & Piel, M. H. (2016). Cultivating resilience in families who foster: Understanding how families cope and adapt over time. Family Process, 55(4), 660–672. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12239

Topic 2: Social Work Practice in Mental Health Wellbeing

Logical positivism lens: Nadal, K. L., Escobar, K. M. V., Prado, G. T., David, E. J. R., & Haynes, K. (2012). Racial microaggressions and the Filipino American experience: Recommendations for counseling and development. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 40(3), 156–173. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2012.00015.x
Interpretivism lens: Nadal, K. L., Wong, Y., Stricken, J., Griffin, K., & Fujii-Doe, W. (2015). Racial microaggressions and Asian Americans: An exploratory study on within-group differences and mental health. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 6(2), 136–144. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038058

By Day 7
Submit a 2- to 3-page paper that addresses the following:

Provide a brief overview of both articles under the sample topic you selected. What was the article about? What type of research design did the author(s) use? What were the findings?
For the article that is guided by logical positivism, analyze the epistemological, ontological, axiological, and methodological assumptions underlying the study.
For the article that is guided by interpretivism, analyze the epistemological, ontological, axiological, and methodological assumptions underlying the study.
Evaluate the strengths and limitations in using logical positivism and interpretivism to study the topic or problem in the articles.
Identify your potential dissertation or doctoral capstone topic or problem in 1 sentence.
Evaluate the strengths and limitations in using logical positivism and interpretivism to study your selected topic or problem.
Explain how the guiding paradigm of a research study influences your critical evaluation of the evidence presented in the article.