Relationship between epistemology, theoretical research and empirical research in empirical research:
Crumley (2009, pp 16) has described in the book “Introduction to Epistemology” that epistemology is a normative discipline and it aims at offering standards not just describing what we do. Disciplines such as cognitive sociology or psychology are descriptive disciplines and they explain and described how beliefs are acquired. Epistemology is the study of nature of justification and knowledge and this includes viewing at the conditions and sources of justification and knowledge. Whereas Webster, Phalen and Lichty (2006, pp 2) have mentioned in the book “Ratings analysis: the theory and practice of audience research” that theoretical research tests more generalized descriptions of how the world performs. If those descriptions or theories are wide and supported well by evidence and they are also useful in several different settings. Although theoretical research is sometimes done in industrial settings it is more common in the academic world. Schwab (1999, pp 4-7) has described in the book “Research methods for organizational studies” that empirical research can support to gain evidence on the veracity of expected casual relationships of the type described. Empirical research denotes expected relationships through the systematic study of relationships between scores gained from cases on measures.
In recognizing the knowledge conditions theorists say that in order to have knowledge specific conditions must be met and that conditions must be measured up. Similarly in recognizing the conditions of justified belief epistemologists claim that some beliefs are better than other and some beliefs measured up to the justification standard. Whereas in recognizing the knowledge sources epistemologists are also trying to say why a specific source satisfies the justified knowledge and knowledge conditions. On the other hand theoretical research make matters even more difficult a particular piece of research must serve either need conceivably relying on who is reading the lessons and the study they learn. This flexibility is probably a better thing but it does not mean that the boundary between theoretical researches is sometimes critical to determine.
Besson and Marti (2006, pp 58) described that the current state of literature makes it clear that both empirical and theoretical research queries remain unresolved. Further rigorous theoretical analysis is needed about philosophical queries as the reasons to value political participation and the relationship between validity and procedures. On the other hand several empirical researches is required in order to assess occurring democratic arrangements and proposed developments. Such research must be informed by the outcome of theoretical disagreements within normative democratic theory since various theories will have quite varied empirical implications.
克拉姆利（2009，P 16）已在书中描述的“介绍认识论”的认识论是一个规范性的学科，它的目的是提供标准不只是描述我们做什么。社会学和心理学等学科的认知是描述性的学科和他们解释和描述如何信仰的获得。认识论是研究大自然的理由和知识，这包括观看的条件和来源的理由和知识。而韦氏，麻木和利克蒂（2006，P 2）都在书中提到的“收视率分析：受众研究的理论与实践”理论研究测试更广义说明世界如何执行。如果这些描述或理论是广泛和支持的证据，他们也有用在几个不同的设置。虽然理论研究有时在工业设置，这是较为常见的在学术界。嘉信（1999，P 7）已在书中描述的“为组织学的研究方法，实证研究可以支持获得的证据的真实性将因果关系的类型描述。实证研究表明预期的关系，通过系统学习成绩之间的关系从案件中获得的措施。