Schuermans, 2013: Towards rigour in qualitative research

BMJ, 2008

Indian Journal of Public Health, 2012

Traditionally, qualitative studies are founded on interpretative and constructive epistemology. The process of data collection in these studies is longer and intensive. This helps to build a strong rapport with the community, hence enabling to capture the field as naturally as possible. These characteristics provide an ample scope to take care of quality and validity of data. However, in applied situations, data collection is often a truncated activity. This robs away a number of taken-for-granted strengths of traditional qualitative research methods: No time is spent on rapport building; holism is left behind, instead we engage in selection; we focus narrowly on specific phenomenon of concern, divorced from its context; analysis does not evolve out of an iterative process. In this paper, we aim to discuss some of the issues related to rigor and quality of such studies and strategies available to address them.

Qualitative & Multi-Method Research, 2005

Qualitative research, defined here in contrast to quantitative research as consisting of verbal as opposed to numerical statements or, more simply, of words as opposed to numbers, is an inextricable, necessary component of the social sciences. Moreover, for a variety of reasons, the bulk of existing knowledge in the social sciences has been generated through qualitative research and this form of research probably will continue to be the most commonly used path to knowledge. Yet a great part of the potential of qualitative research is not realized because the methodological foundation of this research is shaky.

Psychology in Society , 2020

This paper identifies a number of common conceptual and methodological weaknesses that crop up in qualitative social science research articles and theses. These weaknesses are: (1) conceptual frameworks with no implications; (2) conceptual frameworks which dominate findings; (3) generic technical jargon in methods sections instead of a transparent account of how the research and analytical decisions actually proceeded; (4) superficial and/or anecdotal results sections; and (5) an overuse of social science jargon that sometimes does not mean very much. Suggestions for improving on these weaknesses are made. It is argued that the validity of a piece of qualitative research is established through coherence among all sections of a paper or thesis-concepts, methods, and findings. The metaphor in the paper's title conveys the point that simply including the right-sounding terminology or sections in a qualitative research article or thesis in the hope that this will, in and of itself, produce good social science is a strategy about as likely to succeed as sticking feathers together in the hope of eventually producing a duck!

Nordic Studies on Alcohol and Drugs

Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan

Prior research has explored qualitative studies in relation to the paradigms used. This paper enriches the literature by investigating the quality of qualitative studies in relation to the data collection method and participants' selection. In this study, we collected SNA qualitative paper proceedings from 2007 to 2017. Guided by the minimum criteria of the data collection method described in the literature review sections, we analyze those proceedings. We found the three most common methods used in the studies: interview, observation, and documentation. The majority of the paper clearly stated their data collection method. However, only a minority of them provides a clear description of how the data were collected and how to obtain participants/data used in their studies and why invite dthem in the research. Thus, it is suggested that researchers provide a detail explanation of their methods to show the rigour of the study that they conducted

Earlier treatments of moderatum generalization (e.g. Williams, 2000a) explicitly addressed interpretivist sociology. This article extends that earlier argument by examining some of its implications for a wider range of qualitative research methods. It first adopts an empirical approach, providing concrete illustrations from the most recent volume of Sociology of what sociologists actually do when describing the meaning of their findings. In the light of this, we reconsider the significance of moderatum generalization for research practice and the status of sociological knowledge, in particular making the case that research design should plan for anticipated generalizations, and that generalization should be more explicitly formulated within a context of supporting evidence.

Field Methods, 2007

However, relatively few have presented the results of using criteria for validity of qualitative studies. We investigated the quality of reconstructing interpretative frames, a method for analyzing interview transcripts. The aim of this method is to describe a person's perspective, distinguishing between perceived problem definitions, proposed solutions, empirical background theories, and normative preferences. Based on this description, one should be able to estimate this person's cooperation on implementing specific changes in his or her practice. In this article, we assessed the interobserver reliability of this analytical method as an indicator of its rigor. Six analysts reconstructed interpretative frames on the basis of verbatim transcripts of three interviews. The analysts agreed only moderately about the issues identified and which problems should be prioritized. However, they showed remarkable unanimity as to the estimates of the respondents' cooperation on proposed solutions.

Educational Action Research, 1997

The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sublicensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.