Book Review
A Realist Approach for Qualitative
ResearchJoseph A. Maxwell. Sage Publications, Inc., 2012. (222pages). ISBN: 9780761929239

Reviewed by Jérémie Bouchard
Hokkai Gakuen University

In a recent issue of OnCUE Journal, Keith Ford highlighted the need for abalance of theoretical perspectives to be represented in this journal. A new bookby Dr. Joseph A. Maxwell, A Realist Approach for Qualitative Research, is aninvaluable study for anyone who wants to explore a theoretical perspective whichtreads the ground between qualitative and quantitative research without beingeither naïve or overly complex. In this review I want to outline the components ofa realist approach as propounded by Maxwell and explain its relevance for thoseengaged in applied linguistics research. Since Maxwell formulates his approach tosocial studies by referring to applied linguistics as just one of several disciplines in
the field, I will also discuss Belz’s research on German-American telecollaboration,
one of the very few empirical works in applied linguistics framed within a realist
perspective (Belz, 2002).
In my PhD research project, I interrogate the relationship between theideological discourse of nihonjinron (roughly translated as the “study of Japaneseuniqueness”) and EFL education in Japan. As such, I must look for ways tocombine observable reality (language use in the classroom, for example) withlarger realities beyond the immediate (social structures and cultural systems).
102

A Realistic Approach..., OnCUE Journal, 6(2), pages 102-108

With time, I came to realize that a realist-oriented critical discourse analysis(CDA) (Fairclough, 2010) has the greatest potential for revealing the complexityof the relationship between individuals and social institutions.
Since the 1940s, when the English Language Institute at the University ofMichigan initiated the groundwork in establishing applied linguistics as a fieldof study, quantitative research has been dominant. A large portion of empirical
work has emerged from the positivist tradition which a) prioritizes systematic
regularity and direct causality and b) shows a tendency to overlook diversity indata. In the area of research on nihonjinron and EFL in Japan, I have noticed
that several studies show the same tendency to limit the use of empirical tools toquestionnaires and interviews, then generalize results to the Japanese population
at large (Befu and Manabe, 1987; Gano, 1987; Rivers, 2011; Sullivan andSchatz, 2009; Yoshino, 1992). From this basis, Befu & Manabe (1987), Gano(1987) and Yoshino (1992) conclude that there is a direct causal link between
nihonjinron and educational practices. I believe that this approach to research isproblematic, because in attempting to quantify complex social processes there is atemptation to overlook data which may appear extraneous, or to over-amplify thesignificance of certain data. On the other hand, the most notable shortcomingsof qualitative research are its emphasis on local contexts and its tendency to “usedata collection and analysis methods that emphasize uniformity, such as relying
on key informants and focusing on shared themes and concepts” (Maxwell, 2012,
p. 64). In short, neither of these research traditions is entirely convincing. Maxwell
proposes a more viable strategy which combines both methodological traditions
as a form of triangulation, each approach compensating for the shortcomings ofthe other.
Dr. Maxwell’s book is structured in the following way. Part One outlines
the realist approach to social research and provides insightful explanations ofconcepts such as meaning, culture, causation and diversity. Part Two defines
central qualitative research approaches. It explains the design of a variegatedapproach to research. Here, the author addresses important research issues suchas validity, reliability and evidence. Part Three provides two actual applicationsof critical realism in social research. In the first example, Maxwell studies kinship103

Bouchardsystems and social organization among Plains Indians. In it, he recounts howhe, as a cultural anthropologist, moved from positivism to interpretivism, toconstructivism, and finally to a realist perspective. The second example is a yearlong ethnographic fieldwork project in a northern Canadian Inuit community.
Here, Maxwell recalls how he solidified his realist stance by deepening his views
on meaning and diversity.
Maxwell positions himself within the realist tradition initiated by Bhaskar(1978, 1979, 1998) by first defining realism as an ontological perspective. Morespecifically, he holds that the relationship between ontology (what reality is) andepistemology (how we perceive that reality) is complex. Taking from Kant’s twoworld interpretation and from Husserl’s phenomenology of perception, realism
rejects theories which conflate epistemology and ontology. Instead, it sees bothforms of knowledge as possessing sui generis properties. Consequently, one of theprimary concerns for realist-oriented research should be to provide an account of
the relationship between these two forms of knowledge.
Maxwell’s particular realist perspective echoes Bhaskar’s (1998) and Corson’s(1997) critical brand of realism. He defines critical realism as an approach toknowledge and empirical research which combines a realist ontology and aconstructivist epistemology (i.e., our understanding of reality is our own creation,composed for our own specific purposes). This effectively calls into question thenotion of pure objectivity in research. Maxwell stresses that all of our knowledge
is partial, incomplete and fallible. Therefore, our epistemology is essentiallyinterpretive as opposed to straightforwardly representational. But if we only haveour senses to perceive the world, and if our perceptions are essentially differentfrom the reality we aim to describe, how are we to assert any claim to knowledge?
In response, realist thinkers, including Sayer (2000), ask a further question: what
is it about reality which leads us to form the kind of knowledge we have of it? Put
differently, because epistemology is constructed through discourse, and ontology
possesses properties that are distinct from epistemology, what is it about ontology
which leads us to formulate epistemological discourse in the way we do? To me,
this question is refreshing because it is a departure from post-structuralism andother forms of relativism which define social reality as entirely constituted by104

A Realistic Approach..., OnCUE Journal, 6(2), pages 102-108

discourse.
Critical realism has long been rejected by many advocates of empiricism
and quantitative research on the basis that, while it criticized empiricism’s takeon probability and causality, it offered nothing back in return. However, insuggesting terms such as process or mechanism instead of long accepted notions
like cause or rule, I believe Maxwell offers a valid alternative.
Maxwell has devoted much of his academic life to the realist approach tosocial inquiry. For over 25 years, he has been actively teaching, researching andwriting on qualitative research design, especially the philosophy and logic ofresearch methodology. Some of his main foci include cultural and social theory
and the integration of qualitative and quantitative research methods.
Maxwell’s approach is of great significance to applied linguistics for two main
reasons. First, since using a language is not just a cognitive but a social practice,
we need to frame our accounts of language use within the larger field of social
research. This is not to say that SLA research has overlooked social contexts
altogether. But for the most part, this area has been given marginal attention.
Of course, accounting for the social stratum influences both data collection
procedures and data interpretations. As such, because the larger social sphere
often resides beyond the directly observable, we need to contemplate a richer
approach to interpretative research.
Second, Maxwell offers valuable insights into the notion of diversity. He
takes from Wallace’s (1970) views on culture and argues that the field of social
research has been dominated by the replication of uniformity model, whichholds that similarities between people are what bind societies together. A famous
example of such approach is Benedict’s (1946) The Chrysanthemum and theSword, which describes Japanese post-war society in terms of its shared values
and rituals. In contrast, by adhering to the organization of diversity approach
to culture, he argues that social diversity is not only real but fundamental tosocial organization. Sugimoto and Mouer’s (2002) study of Japanese culture andsociety is a good example of this approach. By emphasizing contiguity rather thansimilarity, Maxwell shows that solidarity is created by processes which have less to
do with similarities or commonalities between individuals, but with contiguity,105

Bouchardor a combination of differences and complementarity between people.
Pertaining specifically to qualitative research, Maxwell’s contribution issignificant because it considers people’s beliefs, intentions and feelings as equallyreal entities (in the ontological sense) as objects or processes. Furthermore, their
discursive formulation can reveal valuable insights into humans’ understandingof their world. The author expands on this view by stressing that people’sbeliefs, intentions and feelings are not inherent but socially constructed. Also,
because these mental characteristics are crucial in explaining the kinds of actionsindividuals choose to undertake, social research should pay close attention tothem. To achieve this, Maxwell points towards the analysis of verbal behavior,i.e., CDA.
Personally, I have found Dr. Maxwell’s book to be one of the most engaging,insightful, informative and motivational books on the subject of qualitative
research to date. Unfortunately, little is said about applied linguistics per se.
However, I believe that his insights into social processes and social research
can help us realize, as applied linguists, that the study of language learning
involves observation and interpretation of highly complex phenomena, andmost importantly, that our field must be located within the larger field of socialresearch.
In closing, I invite readers to look for Belz (2002), one of the very few genuinely
applied linguistics research adhering to a realist perspective. In her paper, she
focuses on German-American telecollaboration and combines both quantitativeand qualitative research methods. By distinguishing between context and setting(structure) and situated activity and self (agency), Belz employs a stratified view
into social reality, which is characteristic of the realist approach. Each stratum
is observed through both quantitative and qualitative means. Different formsof discourse are analyzed through different analytical tools, bridging fields
such as psychology, political science, technology and applied linguistics. Most
noticeably, she refrains from establishing clear causal relationships or making
deterministic claims to truth. Instead, she argues that the relationship between
context/setting and situated activity/self is multi-directional, and therefore no
single cause can be revealed. Yet, she remains confident that her overall analysis,106

A Realistic Approach..., OnCUE Journal, 6(2), pages 102-108

being ecologically rich, can act as solid basis for a concluding discussion on
pedagogical implications.
To me, a realist approach to qualitative research, such as the one advocatedby Maxwell and applied by Belz, is ideal because it conceptualizes the notion ofcausality by first distinguishing between ontology and epistemology. Accordingly,
while human interpretation of reality constitutes a real world in itself, it alsointeracts with ontological reality in a causal relationship. To reveal this process,it is crucial for us to enrich our interpretations of real-world phenomena
while asking ourselves: what is it about reality which leads us to formulate ourinterpretations of it in the way we do?

Acknowledgments
I would like to thank Ellen Head, section editor for the OnCUE Journal, for hervaluable input.

References
Befu, H., & Manabe, K. (1987). An empirical study of nihonjinron: How real isthe myth? Kwansei Gakuin University Annual Studies (Nishinomiya), 36,98-111.
Belz, J. A. (2002). Social dimensions of telecollaborative foreign language study.
Language Learning and Technology, 6(1), 60-81.
Benedict, R. (1946). The chrysanthemum and the sword: Patterns of Japaneseculture. London, England: Routledge.
Bhaskar, R. (1978). A realist theory of science. Sussex, England: Harvester Press.
Bhaskar, R. (1979). The possibility of naturalism: A philosophical critique of thecontemporary human sciences. Brighton, England: Harvester Press.
Bhaskar, R. (1998). The possibility of naturalism (3rd ed.). London, England:
Routledge.
Corson, D, (1997). Critical realism: An emancipatory philosophy for appliedlinguistics? Applied Linguistics, 18(2), 166-88.
107

Bouchard

Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language(2nd ed.). Harlow. England: Pearson Education Limited.
Gano, J. V. (1987). Generational change in Japanese nationalism (Vols.1-2).
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Maxwell, J. A. (2012). A realist approach for qualitative research. London,
England: Sage.
Rivers, D. J. (2011). Japanese national identification and English language
learning processes. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 35, 111123.
Sayer, A. (2000). Realism and social science. London, England: Sage.
Sugimoto, Y., & Mouer, R. E. (2002). Images of Japanese society. London,
England: Routledge.
Sullivan, N., & Schatz, R. T. (2009). Effects of Japanese national identification
on attitudes toward learning English and self-assessed English proficiency.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 33(6), 486-497.
Wallace, A. F. C. (1970). Culture and personality (2nd ed.). New York, NY:Random House.
Yoshino, K. (1992). Cultural nationalism in contemporary Japan: A sociologicalenquiry. London, England: Routledge.

$XWKRU·V%LR
Jérémie Bouchard is a full-time EFL lecturer in the Faculty of Humanities, Hokkai
Gakuen University. He began a PhD degree in January 2012 via distance education
at The University of Birmingham, England. His research focuses on the relationshipbetween ideological discourse and EFL classroom practices at the junior high schoollevel. bouchardjeremie@yahoo.com

Received: July 27, 2012
Accepted: August 27, 2012108