This communication is based on the research process of a PhD thesis and the question of study is to understand what a feminist perspective means. To make this proposal we must mention the ontological, epistemological, and methodological dimensions.

Ontological dimension

The ontological dimension challenges us as researchers with questions like: does reality exist? Is this reality an entity constructed by sociohistorical moments? Or is it something that can be objectified? (Folguerias-Bertomeu, 2018). The ontological dimension this feminist research is in framed is socio-critical or critical, since it considers that reality is interpretable. It is positioned in historical realism, understanding the potential for change that may exist and where subject and object are not two isolated entities, but rather interact with each other influenced by a social commitment (Guba and Lincoln, 1994).

Epistemological dimension

We position ourselves in a critical feminist epistemology. The sociocritical position within epistemology defends a praxeological epistemology, assuming that there is an interaction between the person investigating and the person being investigated; therefore, the values and beliefs of the person who is investigating are considered, as they can influence the knowledge (Folgueiras-Bertomeu, 2018). It is also an epistemology (Popkewitz, 1988) that unites theory and practice and understands knowledge as emancipating and liberating. Furthermore, it encourages researchers to carry out a constant self-reflection exercise in the research process.

About the nature of knowledge, we start from the "point of view theory" (Harding,1987; Haraway,1991), which arises from the analysis that certain groups have not been represented in the access to and production of knowledge; therefore, knowledge is only related to a minority. This theory not only argues that systemic inequalities are embedded in knowledge, but that this science is constructed within a social locus and historical context. Applying the point of view theory is necessary to enrich the endeavor of "knowledge" and to have a more complete vision of reality, because as Dorothy Smith (2004) exposes, when these social loci are highlighted, it is possible to see more, beyond or “below the ideology of the powerful”; consequently, it becomes a more reliable knowledge.

In conclusion, while avoiding a relativistic view on reality, it is also important to understand that reality can accommodate different points of view.

Methodological dimension

At this point, the contributions Harding makes in her text “Is There a Feminist Method?” are interesting and necessary. According to the author, feminist research has often highlighted novelties in method or methodology to underline the differences with non-feminist research. However, the point is not using a different method or methodology, but the way in which a change in the epistemological position makes us question them and apply them in a different manner.

Emphasizing the changes in method or methodology only can conceal the importance and depth of the epistemological shift in these investigations.

This communication is part of the first phase of PhD thesis in a survey investigation. We can divide our methodological reflection on the application of the feminist perspective into three sections: the review of the literature for the construction of the dimensions, the elaboration and validation of the instrument and the methodological meta-reflection. Construction of the survey dimensions In the review of the literature and identification of the relevant dimensions, we have started from the theory of the point of view previously explained. Therefore, it has been taken into consideration from where the knowledge arose and what was the sociohistorical position of the study. We have also been guided by the contributions of Biglia and Vergés-Bosch (2016) with questions such as "In the systematic delimitation of the topic, what criteria have been followed for the selection of the bibliography?" or “Are there research purposes that support the feminist political agenda?”, among others. First preparation and validation of the instrument The first elaboration of the questionnaire has been carried out in a deductive, inductive, and participatory way. As Agee (2009) points out, the questions inform about the meaning and direction in theoretical and methodological terms, so, in this part, the approaches provided by Jiménez (2021) have been considered, such as, for example, which are the questions that are being asked, what are the questions that are not being asked and why, how are the questions being asked and if there are any realities that are being excluded or marginalized. The participatory elaboration was applied with the aim of making the informants into agents of the investigative process to break the dichotomy between object of study/researcher so criticized by some feminist researchers (Donoso-Vázquez and Velasco-Martínez, 2013). Last, eight experts from the methodological and feminist field have taken part in the validation by judges with the aim of carrying out a review of this perspective at a specialist level. Meta reflection through the epistemological diary The epistemological diary is the tool used for the meta-reflection that occurs throughout the research process in a transversal way. This technique makes it possible to analyze the research process itself, to question the approaches and to capture values, beliefs, as well as self-reflections. It is also useful to externalize research processes that would remain hidden, as well as to work with the gender, race, and class as constitutive categories of the practice of analysis (Cortés, 2021).

In conclusion, we consider that the feminist perspective can be applied to the quantitative methodology. Although it may seem unnecessary due to the nature of this procedure, it has been reported (Biglia et al., 2022) that quantitative data have a high potential to reproduce gender inequalities. Also, the incorporation of this perspective can lead us to identify indicators that provide clarity and greater solutions to reverse inequalities. Secondly, depending on the feminist perspective to be considered, we believe it is important to make a methodological reflection to assess from which ontological, epistemological, and methodological assumptions we are going to build our work. In this sense and following all that has been said thus far, we do not want to discuss whether there is a particular and different methodology that can be considered feminist, but we defend this epistemological rethinking in research. Furthermore, highlighting the importance of this positioning. However, this reconsideration assumes an analysis of the methodology and methods. In relation to this, and entering the phase in which we find ourselves in the PhD thesis, our way of applying this feminist perspective has been through a review of the literature based on situated knowledge that has allowed to build the dimensions of the survey, analyzing the elaboration of the questions through instruments contributed by various feminist authors (Jiménez, 2021: Biglia and Vergés-Bosch, 2016) and making the informants into active agents of the construction of the questionnaire. The questionnaire has also undergone a validation from experts in the subject. Finally, we introduce the epistemological diary as a useful tool to examine all the processes that occur within a study and to carry out a constant exercise of self-reflection and review.

Agee, J. (2009). Developing qualitative research questions: A reflective process. International journal of qualitative studies in education, 22(4), 431-447. Biglia et al. (2022) Introduint la perspectiva de gènere interseccional a les estadístiques. Guia teoricopràctica. Eines. Biglia, B., i Vergés Bosch, N. (2016). Cuestionando la perspectiva de género en la investigación. REIRE: revista d'innovació i recerca en educació. https://10.1344/reire2016.9.2922 Cortés, R. J. (2021). Diseño y desafíos metodológicos de la investigación feminista en ciencias sociales. Empiria: Revista de metodología de ciencias sociales, (50), 177-200. https://doi.org/10.5944/empiria.50.2021.30376 Donoso-Vázquez, T., i Velasco-Martínez, A. (2013). ¿Por qué una propuesta de formación en perspectiva de género en el ámbito universitario? Profesorado. Revista de currículum y formación de profesorado, 17(1), 71-88. http://www.ugr.es/local/recfpro/rev171ART5.pdf Folgueiras Bertomeu, P. (2018). Programa Docente e Investigador. Investigación Socioeducativa. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. Handbook of qualitative research, 2, 163-194. Haraway, D. (1991). Simians, Cyborgs and Women. The Reinvention of Nature. Free Assn Books. Harding, S. G. (Ed.). (1987). Feminism and methodology: Social science issues. Indiana University Press. Jimenez, R. (2021). Diseño y desafíos metodológicos de la investigación feminsita en ciencias sociales. Empiria. Revista De metodología De Ciencias Sociales, (50), 177–200. https://doi.org/10.5944/empiria.50.2021.30376 Popkewitz, T. (1988). Paradigma e ideología en investigación educativa. Mondadori. Smith, D. E. (2004). Women’s perspective as a radical critique of sociology. The feminist standpoint theory reader: Intellectual and political controversies, 1.