Ontology, epistemology, and paradigms - What are they, and how much should you write about them in your PhD thesis?
Someone asks you, “Can you say a bit more about your epistemological position?”.
Maybe it’s your PhD supervisor, or a panel member at annual review time.
You say something that sounds reasonable. They nod. You think that was okay. You make a mental note to look up the meaning of “epistemology” later.
If you’ve had a moment like this recently, ask yourself this:
What were they actually asking me to do there?
Epistemology - and ontology, paradigm, and other such words in this ballpark - are often presented as abstract concepts, when in practice, they’re doing a much simpler job.
They are there to explain the logic of your study.
In my twenty years supporting PhD students in their qualitative doctoral studies, I’ve seen a lot of researchers get very anxious about ontology and epistemology - because they’re inaccessible, intimidating words. However, when you understand the function of them, that’s when things finally start to click.
What’s actually being asked of you
When someone asks about your ontology or epistemology, they are not asking you to define these terms.
They are asking:
What are you assuming about the world you’re studying
What are you assuming about how we can know things about it?
Does that make sense given the kind of research you’re doing?
That’s it.
This is what those terms are really getting at.
A simple way to think about it
Ontology is about reality.
What do you think is actually going on in the thing you’re studying?
Is there one shared reality that everyone experiences in the same way? Or do people experience things differently, depending on their situation and perspective?
Epistemology is about knowledge.
How do you think we can understand or learn about that reality?
Are you trying to measure something as objectively as possible?
Or are you trying to understand how people make sense of their experiences?
A paradigm is the bigger picture.
It’s the combination of those ideas. It’s your overall position on what’s going on, how we can understand it, and what that means for how you carry out your research.
Why this feels harder than it should
Most PhD researchers can get to the point where they understand these definitions.
The difficulty is not about understanding them, it’s writing about them in a way that connects to your actual study.
This is the point where you move from:
“I understand the terminology”
to:
“I’m now stating my position”
That’s a vulnerable point.
The mistake most people make
The instinct at this stage is to write something like: “This study adopts an interpretivist paradigm…” and then add a paragraph of definitions underneath.
What your examiner is looking for is much simpler:
Does your stance make sense for your research questions?
Does it align with your method?
Can you explain the logic clearly?
What this should look like in practice
Instead of separating everything out, you want to show the thinking in motion. For example:
This study assumes that social reality is shaped through interpretation and interaction, meaning participants may experience the same phenomenon in different ways. It therefore adopts an interpretivist approach to knowledge, focusing on how meaning is constructed rather than measured. This positions the research within an interpretivist paradigm, which aligns with the use of qualitative methods.
That kind of paragraph does far more work than a page of definitions.
If this feels difficult, it’s not because the concepts are beyond you.
It’s because this is one of the first places in a PhD where you are required to take a position, justify it, and make your assumptions visible.
If you want this to feel clear rather than vague
If you’re at the point where you understand the terms but don’t yet feel confident writing your own position clearly, that’s exactly the stage I designed the Conceptual & Theoretical Foundations PhD Survival Guide for.
It walks you through how to incorporate paradigms, ontology and epistemology into your work so your approach reads as intentional, not pieced together.
You can learn more here.
If your research is moving, but something underneath it doesn’t fully make sense yet, this guide will help you get it back on solid ground.
This is not about starting from scratch, it’s about making sense of the conceptual and theoretical foundations that are already shaping your work - so you can explain, defend, and build on them with confidence.
If your project feels slightly unclear, fragmented, or harder to articulate than it should, this guide helps you steady it, so your research starts to come together as a coherent whole.
Designed for qualitative doctoral researchers working with interviews, fieldnotes, documents, thematic analysis, grounded theory, ethnography, and related approaches.
Inside, you’ll work through seven carefully sequenced sections with practical worksheets to help you:
Understand paradigms and epistemology without getting lost in jargon
Clarify how your concepts connect to your research questions
Articulate your theoretical position with more confidence
Ensure your title reflects what your research is actually doing
If you’ve ever thought:
“I understand this… but not enough to defend it.”
“I’ve done the work, but I’m not sure how it all fits together.”
This guide helps you make your research foundations visible, so you can move forward with clarity, coherence, and confidence.
When the foundations are clear, everything else becomes easier: your literature review, your methodology, and your writing.
This is a digital download. You’ll get immediate access to the full guide and worksheets as soon as you purchase, so you can start making progress straight away.
Swipe through the images to see exactly what’s inside.
For a more streamlined and coherent approach, you can access all four PhD Survival Guides in the full series here.
Got questions? Contact me using this form, I’ll be happy to help.
By purchasing this product, you agree to our Terms & Conditions.