The Methodological Pyramid
Thirty-five labels arranged in three tiers. Read properly it is the fastest structural check available on a research design; read carelessly it becomes a menu, which is precisely what it is not.
What the figure sets out
The methodological pyramid is a triangle divided into three horizontal tiers, narrow at the top and wide at the base. Beside each tier the figure carries two columns of labels naming the options that belong to that tier. It is attributed in the supplied teaching source to a first-edition business research methods text, cited in the references below.
The geometry is doing the argument. The base is the widest tier because philosophical position underpins everything above it, and the apex is the narrowest because a data collection method is the most specific and most constrained choice you make.
- Fundamental philosophies
- Research methodologies
- Data collection methods
The base tier: eight fundamental philosophies
The base tier names the philosophical frameworks a study can be situated within. Four appear in the figure's left column and four in its right. The source treats several of these elsewhere and leaves the others entirely alone.
TIER 3 — FUNDAMENTAL PHILOSOPHIES, AS LABELLED ON THE FIGURE
| Philosophy on the base tier | Where else it appears in the supplied source | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Positivism | Defined in the source's table of epistemological terminology under the heading “Positivist” | Defined |
| Constructionism | The source's prose names constructionism; its table uses “Constructivist” and defines that | Defined under a different spelling |
| Interpretivism | Defined in the same table under the heading “Interpretive” | Defined |
| Functionalism | Named in the prose as one of the other philosophical frameworks used in social science research | Label only |
| Critical theory | The prose and the table treat “critical inquiry”; critical theory is not separately addressed | Label only |
| Feminism | Named in the prose list of other philosophical frameworks | Label only |
| Post structuralism | Does not appear anywhere else in the supplied source | Label only |
| Post modernism | Named in the prose as postmodernism, in the same list of other frameworks | Label only |
Spellings are the figure's. The naming drift between constructionism and constructivism is discussed under source gaps below.
Whichever framework you are working within, it carries assumptions about what exists and about how knowledge of it can be created. Those two questions have their own pages: ontology for assumptions about the nature of being, and epistemology for how knowledge is made and justified.
The middle tier: fourteen research methodologies
The middle tier names strategies for carrying out a study — the design, in the source's own terms, rather than the instruments. Seven labels sit in each column.
TIER 2 — RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES, AS LABELLED ON THE FIGURE
| Methodology on the middle tier | Defined in the source's methodology table? | Type given by the source |
|---|---|---|
| Survey | Label only | — |
| Case study | Label only | — |
| Experimental design | Yes, as “Experimental” | Quantitative |
| Ethnography | Label only — it appears elsewhere only as an associated term of “Interpretive” | — |
| Action research | Yes, as “Action” | Qualitative |
| Grounded theory | Label only | — |
| Content analysis | Label only | — |
| Discourse analysis | Label only | — |
| Documentary analysis | Label only | — |
| Textual analysis | Label only | — |
| Semiotics | Label only | — |
| Image-based research | Label only | — |
| Archival research | Label only | — |
| Feminist research | Label only — “feminist” appears in the source's short list of other methodologies | — |
The seven methodologies the source does define are set out on the research methodologies overview; only two of them are named on this tier.
The apex: thirteen data collection methods
The apex names the instruments — the ways data is actually gathered. Six labels sit in the left column and seven in the right. The supplied source defines none of them individually.
TIER 1 — DATA COLLECTION METHODS, AS LABELLED ON THE FIGURE
| Method at the apex | Grouping (this site's reading) | Defined in the supplied source? |
|---|---|---|
| Observation | Watching and recording | Label only |
| Questionnaires | Asking directly | Label only |
| Interviews | Asking directly | Label only |
| Focus groups | Asking directly, in groups | Label only |
| Scales | Asking directly, structured | Label only |
| Projective techniques | Asking indirectly | Label only |
| Vignettes | Asking indirectly | Label only |
| Life history | Accounts produced by participants | Label only |
| Narrative | Accounts produced by participants | Label only |
| Diaries | Accounts produced by participants | Label only |
| Images | Material generated or found | Label only |
| Documents/Records/Archives | Existing material | Label only |
| Internet research | Existing material | Label only |
The source's only substantive statement about this tier is that, in a research project, data constitutes evidence. See data collection methods for the full extent of what it says.
What the pyramid does not tell you
There is a second, easily missed gap. The figure's methodology tier and the source's own methodology table are largely different lists, and each contains labels the other omits.
On the pyramid, undefined in the source's methodology table
- Survey
- Case study
- Ethnography
- Grounded theory
- Content analysis
- Discourse analysis
- Documentary analysis
- Textual analysis
- Semiotics
- Image-based research
- Archival research
- Feminist research
Defined in the source's methodology table, absent from the pyramid
- Historical
- Comparative
- Descriptive
- Correlation
- Evaluation
Only two labels appear in both: experimental design and action research. Two supplied lists of methodologies overlapping on two entries is a useful corrective — neither list is a closed set, and a methodology missing from the figure is not thereby disqualified. The consolidated view is set out in the methodology catalogue.
Using the pyramid on live work
The figure earns its place because it makes one class of error visible: choosing an instrument before you have a design, and a design before you have a position. Direction of travel depends on whether you are building or auditing.
Which way to climb
The discipline of keeping the tiers aligned has its own page: methodological coherence sets out the source's requirement that every step fit the nature, aim, population and context of the study.
Four ways the figure gets misread
- Reading it as a maturity model, in which higher tiers are more advanced. The tiers are layers of a single design, not levels of achievement. A study is not improved by climbing.
- Reading the left and right columns as a meaningful division. The supplied source assigns the two columns no significance; treat the split as page layout until something tells you otherwise.
- Reading it as a menu in which any apex item combines with any base item. The figure shows dependency, not free choice, and a positivist framework with a purely interpretive instrument set will not survive examination.
- Reading the apex as where the real work happens. Instruments are the most visible tier and the least consequential; a well-run interview programme serving the wrong methodology still produces the wrong answer.
If you want the vocabulary underneath the whole figure in one place, the five basic elements of a research project sets out epistemology, methodology, methods, ontology and theoretical perspective as the source defines them, along with the theoretical perspective that the pyramid does not draw but the source insists is there.
A five-minute check against your own design
Run this before you commit to a data collection method
- You can name the tier each of your choices sits on, and say which tier you decided first.
- You can state the philosophical framework your study is situated within, in the source's own vocabulary where possible.
- Your methodology is a strategy for the whole study, not a synonym for the instrument you plan to use.
- Every method at the apex serves the methodology you named, and you can say how.
- For any label you have taken from the figure, you can point to a defined source for its meaning — and you know that the figure itself is not one.
What to carry forward
- Philosophy underneath, methodology on top of philosophy, methods on top of methodology. That order is the figure's entire argument.
- Thirty-five labels are named; only a minority are defined anywhere in the supplied source, and this site does not fill the gaps by invention.
- The two columns beside each tier carry no stated meaning. Do not build an interpretation on them.
- The figure's methodology tier and the source's methodology table overlap on only two labels — treat both as partial lists.
- Design from the base upwards; audit from the apex downwards.
Frequently asked questions
How many labels does the pyramid actually contain?
Thirty-five: 13 data collection methods at the apex, 14 research methodologies in the middle tier and 8 fundamental philosophies at the base. They are distributed across a left and a right column beside each tier.
Does the pyramid define the methods and methodologies it lists?
No. It supplies labels only. The supplied source defines five epistemological terms and seven methodologies in separate tables, and of those seven methodologies only experimental design and action research also appear on the figure. For the remaining labels the source offers no definition.
Do the left and right columns mean anything?
The supplied source does not say that they do. The labels are simply split into two columns beside each tier. Until a defining source states otherwise, treat the arrangement as layout rather than classification.
Can I use a methodology that is not on the figure?
Yes. The source's own methodology table defines five methodologies that the figure omits — historical, comparative, descriptive, correlation and evaluation — which demonstrates that neither list is closed. What matters is that you can define the methodology from a cited work and show that it fits your question.
Which tier should I decide first?
The base, if you are designing. The figure's logic is that philosophy underpins methodology and methodology underpins methods, so deciding an instrument first inverts the dependency. When you are auditing someone else's work you reverse the direction and read from the apex down.
Is a higher tier more rigorous than a lower one?
No. The tiers describe layers of one design, not degrees of quality. A study is rigorous when the three tiers are consistent with each other and with the question, not when it reaches the top of the figure.
References and source attribution
- Quinlan, C. 2011, Business Research Methods, 1st ed., Cengage Publishing. Chapter 1, p. 50 — the source of the methodological pyramid as reproduced in the supplied teaching material.
- Clarke, R. J. 2005, Research methods and methodologies, pp. 35–45 — the work the supplied source adapts for its methodology table.
- Bryman, A. 2016, Social Research Methods, 5th ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford. (Listed in the supplied source's reading list.)
- The supplied teaching source: master's-level teaching notes and slides on research methods, including the transcribed figure and its accompanying reading.
Suggested questions for Ask KEVOS
- Which tier of the methodological pyramid does my current design decision belong to?
- Show me which pyramid labels the supplied source actually defines.
- Help me audit a consultant's report from the apex of the pyramid downwards.
- What is the difference between a methodology and a method on this figure?
- Which methodologies does the source define that the pyramid leaves out?