A Comparison of Chinese and Western Qualitative Research Paradigms: With Chinese Traditional Discursive Research as the Core

This study focuses on the core differences between traditional Chinese and mainstream Western qualitative research paradigms. Western qualitative research emphasizes empirical observation, in-depth interviews and thematic induction, and is based on social constructivism and empiricism; whereas traditional Chinese academics build a unique logic of knowledge generation by focusing on classical texts, and integrating interpretation, philosophical deduction, and hieroglyphic thinking. Through comparative analysis, this paper proposes that there are fundamental differences between the two paradigms in six dimensions: ontology, epistemology, methodology, data foundation, conclusion formation and validation criteria. The study concludes that traditional Chinese discursive paths can be regarded as an important subcategory of qualitative research, embodying a cognitive system centered on cultural inheritance, moral reasoning and internal cognition. This study emphasizes the necessity of methodological pluralism and calls for the inclusion of non-Western paradigms of knowledge production in the global academic context in order to achieve a broader theoretical integration and civilizational dialogue.