Opinion Mining in Sociopolitical Research

Introduction

The foundations of sciences have experienced drastic transformations connected to advances in various disciplines. The rupture with the positivist traditional knowledge strengthened in the linearity and segmentation in the discovery process and knowledge accumulation was expressed in Kuhn's postulates (1962), who proposed a revolutionary approach within the epistemology, which affirmed that supposed scientific establish links interrelated among various areas of the same discipline that find common referents, enabling to advance in quantum leaps, where each research is mainstreamed for the progress of the rests. In this context, epistemologists distinguish three big paradigms flows: Positivist, Critical theory, and Constructivism. In the Social Sciences field, these three paradigms transit by the epistemic challenge of the relationship between the knowing subject and the object of study, in a set with the methodology that enables the opening of layers that cover the object essence.

Within the positivist paradigm, the dominant is the observation and the measure applying quantitative, empiric, and rational approaches based on the application of technological tools that enable the discovery of object essence. In consequence, positivism is based on the checking of the hypothesis applying statistical methods that validate the obtained results. This perspective was extensive until the sciences of the social, which only could acquire the category of “science” when used statistical methods to the quantification of social events. As a result, the social researcher was excluded from the observation of processes and the variables' manipulation that gave quantifiable results as a requirement to the cataloging of scientific knowledge of the obtained results. In this context, the social scientist should demonstrate the absolute principle of the knowledge created by a discovered, described, and analyzed dominant reality that potentially can be expressed in universal laws.

From the ontological perspective, positivism establishes a clear distinction between the researcher and the object as an unavoidable mechanism to reduce the bias, which in the social field constituted a weakness, due to limiting the development of qualitative research. Subsequently, the postpositivist current made flexible the concept of the “apprehension of reality” as a unique condition to generate scientific knowledge. Postpositivists indicated that the apprehension of reality by science is only partially feasible since the dynamism of processes and the observer's subjective role disturbs the variables involved and, therefore, the obtained results. During interactive processes the reality is perceptible by the observer, where subject-object are influenced by the counterpart, in consequence, the reflexive exercise of the researcher affects the perception of results, so the theoretical foundation and the exercise of the fallacy of hypothesis enables an approach to the reality that support mixed studies, always under the predominance of the quantity approach, under three modalities: (i) exploratory, (ii) descriptive and (iii) correlational. The first one includes the approach to the phenomenon, the second the characterization and the third establishes relationships among variables.

The critical theory paradigm is based on the materialist dialectic perspective, where theories are confronted in processes that express the society dynamic, deriving in the synthesized expression of postulates in confrontation. The critical theory searches for the recognition of the dialogical relationship subject-object in processes of research, where the researcher can potentially perform active roles exercising reflexivity and participating in processes that induce change in the environment. The method applied in this theory is based on the research-action structured in three stages: (i) observation, (ii) reflection, and (iii) action. The observation phase includes the thematic delimitation and the data collection. In the second stage, the researcher thinks and contrasts the theoretical and methodological background with the collected information, interpreting processes that will guide toward the construction of the results. The action phase includes the intervention of the researcher within the social process in the study, with the finality to reach significant changes.