Comparative study in the paradigm of art research and art creation

    Bambang Sunarto   Affiliation


This article reveals the epistemology of the pillars of existence between art research and artistic creation. The main focus is to tell about the nature of the paradigm, especially the paradigm of research and artistic creation. This discussion is necessary because both have been present as art disciplines that have received wide attention in the academic world. This paper elaborates ideographically on the thoughts of researchers and artists comprehensively when researching and creating art. The aim is to improve epistemological literacy in learning the implementation of research and creating works of art with strong pillars of existence. Anyone concerned with research and art creation has significant potential to carry out academic tasks. Whoever they are, they need a pillar of existence as the basis for intellectual performance. This article describes the nature of the pillars of existence in art research activities and the nature of the pillars of existence in art creation activities. The elements of the two paradigms, the relationship between the pillars of existence, and the elements of the paradigm will receive great attention. This explanation has an important meaning, namely to foster regular reasoning in the development of the paradigm of researchers and art creators, as well as to stimulate the spirit to be accountable for their work academically for art researchers and creators.

Keyword : art research, art research pillars, artistic pillar, creation, paradigm

How to Cite
Sunarto, B. (2023). Comparative study in the paradigm of art research and art creation. Creativity Studies, 16(2), 604-623.
Published in Issue
Sep 26, 2023
Abstract Views
PDF Downloads
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


Ahimsa-Putra, H. Sh. (2008). Paradigma dan revolusi ilmu dalam antropologi budaya – sketsa beberapa episode. Fakultas Ilmu Budaya UGM.

Ahimsa-Putra, H. Sh. (2007). Paradigma, Epistemologi dan Metode Ilmu Sosial-Budaya: Sebuah Pemetaan. Antropologi.

Andersen, H. O., & Koutnik, P. G. (1972). Toward more effective science instruction in secondary education. Macmillan Publishing Company, Inc.

Benjamin, A. C. (1950). Philosophy of the sciences. In V. Ferm (Ed.), A history of philosophical systems (pp. 540–551). Rider and Company.

Black, M. (2018). Critical thinking: An introduction to logic and scientific method. Muriwai Books.

Brade-Birks, S. G., & Higenbottam, F. (1963). Teach Yourself Books. The teach yourself concise encyclopedia of general knowledge. The English Universities Press LTD.

Bunge, M. (1972). Metatheory, in United Nations educational, scientific and cultural organization. In Scientific thought: Some underlying concepts, methods, and procedures (pp. 227–252). Mouton/Unesco.

Caíno-Lores, S., Lapin, A., Carretero, J., & Kropf, P. (2020). Applying big data paradigms to a large scale scientific workflow: Lessons learned and future directions. Future Generation Computer Systems, 110, 440–452.

Cordero, A. (2012). Mario Bunge’s scientific realism. Science and Education, 21(10), 1419–1435.

Ferm, V. (Ed.). (1950). A history of philosophical systems. Rider and Company.

Ford Hoult, Th. (1977). Dictionary of modern sociology. A Littlefield, Adams.

Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Vintage Books.

Franco, M. P. V. (2018). Searching for a scientific paradigm in ecological economics: The history of ecological economic thought, 1880s–1930s. Ecological Economics, 153, 195–203.

Goode, W. J., & Hatt, P. K. (1952). Mcgraw-Hill Series in Sociology and Anthropology. Methods in social research. New York, McGraw-Hill.

Haines, G. (1969). Connecticut College Monographes: Vol. 9. Essays on German influence upon English education and science, 1850–1919. Connecticut College.

Hodges, P., Ruecker, S., Scaletsky, C., Rivera, J., Faller, R., & Geppert, A. (2017). Four criteria for design theories. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 3(1), 65–74.

Hsieh, T., Vaickus, M. H., & Remick, D. G. (2018). Enhancing scientific foundations to ensure reproducibility. The American Journal of Pathology, 188(1), 6–10.

Humardani, G. (1991). Gendhon Humardani: Pemikiran dan Kritiknya. R. Rustopo (Ed.). STSI Press.

Ihalauw, J. J. O. I. (2004). Bangunan Teori. Satya Wacana University Press.

Kahler, E. (1970). What is arts? In M. Weitz (Ed.), Problems in aesthetics: An introductory book of readings (pp. 157–192). Macmillan Co.

Kuhn, Th. S. (2012). The structure of scientific revolutions. The University of Chicago Press.

Lather, P. (2004). This is your father’s paradigm: Government intrusion and the case of qualitative research in education. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(1), 15–34.

Lepskiy, V. (2021). Systems analysis of the foundations for the formation of new paradigms of control. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 54(13), 622–626.

Lindsay, R. B. (1973). The role of science in civilization. Greenwood Publishing Group.

Livingstone, S. (2013). The participation paradigm in audience research. The Communication Review, 16(1–2), 21–30.

Ma, Y., & Suna, J. (2012). The design and development of China sports scientific research cooperation platform base on e-science paradigm. Procedia Engineering, 34, 248–253.

Masterman, M. (1999). The nature of a paradigm. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge: Proceedings of the International Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science, London, 1965 (Vol. 4, pp. 59–90). Cambridge University Press.

Morley, D., & Chen, K.-H. (Eds.). (1996). Stuart Hall: Critical dialogues in cultural studies. Routledge.

Mullennix, B. (2023). The purpose of art: What you need to know. Artistry Found.

Parker, D. H. (1920). The principles of aesthetics. Silver, Burdett and Co.

Pascal, Ch., & Bertram, T. (2009). Listening to young citizens: The struggle to make real a participatory paradigm in research with young children. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 17(2), 249–262.

Pascal, Ch., & Bertram, T. (2012). Praxis, ethics and power: Developing praxeology as a participatory paradigm for early childhood research. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 20(4), 477–492.

Rejimon, P. K. (2017). Exploring philosophy of art in Indian approach. International Journal of Research – Granthaalayah, 5(9), 217–223.

Royston, S., & Foulds, Ch. (2021). The making of energy evidence: How exclusions of social sciences and humanities are reproduced (and what researchers can do about it). Energy Research and Social Science, 77.

Rueger, A. (2011). Aesthetics. In D. M. Clarke & C. Wilson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy in early Modern Europe (pp. 201–225). Oxford University Press.

Schreuder, D. A. (2014). Vision and visual perception: The conscious base of seeing. Archway Publishing.

Shears, E. (2022). Why do people create art? Artabys: Modern Art | Visual Arts Education.

Singer, Ch. (1959). A short history of scientific ideas to 1900. The Clarendon Press.

Strickland, C. (1992). The annotated Mona Lisa: A crash course in art-history from prehistoric to post-modern. Andrews McMeel Publishing.

Sumadikara, T. S. (2013). Pengantar Filsafat Ilmu. LoGoz Publishing.

Sunarto, B. (2015). Basic knowledge and reasoning process in the art creation. Open Journal of Philosophy, 5, 285–296.

Sunarto, B. (2013). Epistemologi Penciptaan Seni. Idea Press Yogyakarta.

Sunarto, B. (2020a). Model and concept in the music paradigm of creativity. Music Scholarship, 3, 103–113.

Sunarto, B. (2020b). Returning to Tri Hita Karana in Bali, Indonesia: Setem’s paradigm in the creation of an environmental art. ISVS E-Journal, 7(4), 9–23.

Türkleş, S., Yılmaz, M., & Soylu, P. (2018). Feelings, thoughts and experiences of nurses working in a mental health clinic about individuals with suicidal behaviors and suicide attempts. Collegian, 25(4), 441–446.

Warfield, J. N. (1976). Societal systems: Planning, policy, and complexity. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Weichselbraun, A., Kuntschik, Ph., Francolino, V., Saner, M., Dahinden, U., & Wyss, V. (2021). Adapting data-driven research to the fields of social sciences and the humanities. Future Internet, 13(3).

Weingartner, P., & Dorn, G. J. W. (1990). Studies on Mario Bunge’s Treatise. Rodopi.

Wilson, D. (1969). Where China stands now: An introduction. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists: Science and Public Affairs, 25(2), 4–9.