Experimental action research as the preferred methodology in social, behavioral, health and human sciences

This editorial argues that experimental action research is more suitable than randomized controlled experimental research for social sciences, nursing, midwifery practice, behavioral, health and humanities. Drawing upon philosophical and methodological perspectives from Guba (1981), Lincoln and Guba (1985), Habermas (1987), Gunbayi and Sorm (2018), Whitehead and Schneider (2013), and Gunbayi (2020a, b), this article critiques the positivist paradigm underlying randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and advocates for action research as a more contextually relevant, participatory, and ethically sound approach. The discussion is grounded in an analysis of mixed methods research, social paradigms, and knowledge-constitutive interests, supporting the claim that experimental action research better aligns with the complexities of human-centric disciplines.