Rethinking ‘validity’ and ‘trustworthiness’ in qualitative inquiry: how might we judge the quality of qualitative research in sport and exercise sciences?

2016 ◽  
pp. 352-362
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Qualitative Inquiry ◽  
Sport And Exercise

Informing Client-Centred Practice through Qualitative Inquiry: Evaluating the Quality of Qualitative Research

2002 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 175-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Whalley Hammell
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Occupational Therapy ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Convincing Evidence ◽  
Qualitative Inquiry ◽  
Consumer Involvement ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Sufficient Information ◽  
Critical Scrutiny

Occupational therapists are increasingly embracing qualitative research methods yet little published advice exists in the occupational therapy literature to enable readers to gauge the quality and relevance of researchers' work. If qualitative research is to provide convincing evidence with which to inform theory and practice, it must be capable of withstanding critical scrutiny and practitioners must be given sufficient information with which to evaluate the strength and plausibility of the evidence reported. The process of undertaking qualitative research and of writing and critiquing subsequent reports is not about assessing adherence to rigid rules but of ensuring the appropriateness and thoroughness of data collection, analysis and reporting, given the nature and context of the issue. The espousal of a client-centred ethic also demands consideration of research relevance and usefulness to clients and the degree of consumer involvement throughout the research process. This paper examines an evaluative framework that may be used to assess the quality of qualitative evidence as this is both researched and reported. Recourse to a set of general strategies — used where appropriate – will serve to enhance the quality of qualitative research and assert its potential to inform the client-centred, evidence-based practice of occupational therapy.

scholarly journals Evaluating Qualitative Research for Social Work Practitioners

10.18060/589 ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 188-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cynthia A. Lietz ◽  
Luis E. Zayas
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Social Work ◽  
Knowledge Base ◽  
Research Study ◽  
Qualitative Inquiry ◽  
Qualitative Research Study ◽  
The Social ◽  
Social Work Practitioners ◽  
Work Knowledge

The field of social work expects practitioners remain well informed regarding research advances in their respective areas. Research studies conducted through the lens of qualitative inquiry provide important contributions to the social work knowledge base. The purpose of this manuscript is to provide practitioners some orientation regarding qualitative research methods and to highlight potential strategies researchers may use to enhance the trustworthiness and quality of their research. Specifically, the concept of trustworthiness is defined in the context of qualitative inquiry and questions social work practitioners can ask when evaluating the quality and applicability of a qualitative research study are provided.

scholarly journals Naturalistic Inquiry in E-Learning Research

2005 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shirley Agostinho
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Research Study ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Qualitative Inquiry ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Naturalistic Inquiry ◽  
Rigorous Research ◽  
E Learning ◽  
Learning Research

In this article, the author explains how and why one particular qualitative research approach, the naturalistic inquiry paradigm, was implemented in an e-learning research study that investigated the use of the World Wide Web technology in higher education. A framework is presented that situates the research study within the qualitative research literature. The author then justifies how the study was compliant with naturalistic inquiry and concludes by presenting a model for judging the quality of such research. The purpose of this article is to provide an example of how naturalistic inquiry can be implemented in e-learning research that can serve as a guide for researchers undertaking this form of qualitative inquiry. As such, the focus of the article is to illustrate how methodological issues pertaining to naturalistic inquiry were addressed and justified to represent a rigorous research approach rather than presenting the results of the research study.

scholarly journals Why the Qualitative Health Research (QHR) Review Process Does Not Use Checklists

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 819-821
Author(s):  
Janice Morse
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Quality Criteria ◽  
Qualitative Inquiry ◽  
Journal Editors ◽  
Qualitative Health Research

Using checklists in manuscripts are perceived to indicate quality, transparency, and rigor. Generally, these checklists consist of a list of all of the strategies that may be used to ensure rigor and transparency. Beside each item, there is usually a box to check (or tick) to indicate whether a component is present, and a space on which to note the page each item is listed in the manuscript. Some of these forms also include space for the author to make brief comments to the reviewer. The intent is that the checklist guides the review process to ensure that all components are present in the article, and therefore, that the article is solid enough to publish. However, these checklists consist only of technical/mechanical management of the creation and sorting of data. These lists ignore the value of the product of the research: They do not address the originality, the substance, the contribution, and the potential results to the actual topic—which is after all the purpose of the project itself. Paradoxically, these checklist reviews are undermining the quality of qualitative inquiry. In seeking quality, the criteria for systematic reviews, clinical trials, and evidence have spilled over to represent quality criteria for all qualitative research. They are becoming commonplace for evaluating qualitative research by journal editors, directing the review process, and subsequent evaluation of the research. Of greatest concern is that checklists items are being used by authors themselves to represent their actual text (e.g., “data were saturated”), and the items for completing these forms are read by the reviewers and editors in lieu of reading the article itself (e.g., for signs of “saturation”). Furthermore, the use of these criteria by authors/researchers to guide the conduct of their research, yet meeting all these criteria, whether relevant or pertinent or necessary for their project, and may even invalidate the findings. In this way, these criteria are redefining processes of qualitative inquiry.

Getting out of the Field

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeasik Cho
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Research Community

This chapter provides a review of the book, which explores how to conceptually understand and practically evaluate the quality of qualitative research. Despite the fact that there are few scholarly pieces regarding qualitative research, the depth and creativity that the pioneering researchers have demonstrated are profound, and the extent to which they cover not only the broad quality of qualitative research but also most of the specific qualities expected by many different kinds of qualitative research is incredible. This chapter summarizes the major topics of this book. Final remarks on this exciting, creative, but difficult topic are preceded by the following summary: Fortunately, There are commonly agreed, bold standards for evaluating the goodness of qualitative research in the academic research community. These standards are a part of what is generally called “scientific research.”

Evaluating Qualitative Research

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeasik Cho
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Journal Editors ◽  
The Past ◽  
Grant Proposals

This book provides the qualitative research community with some insight on how to evaluate the quality of qualitative research. This topic has gained little attention during the past few decades. We, qualitative researchers, read journal articles, serve on masters’ and doctoral committees, and also make decisions on whether conference proposals, manuscripts, or large-scale grant proposals should be accepted or rejected. It is assumed that various perspectives or criteria, depending on various paradigms, theories, or fields of discipline, have been used in assessing the quality of qualitative research. Nonetheless, until now, no textbook has been specifically devoted to exploring theories, practices, and reflections associated with the evaluation of qualitative research. This book constructs a typology of evaluating qualitative research, examines actual information from websites and qualitative journal editors, and reflects on some challenges that are currently encountered by the qualitative research community. Many different kinds of journals’ review guidelines and available assessment tools are collected and analyzed. Consequently, core criteria that stand out among these evaluation tools are presented. Readers are invited to join the author to confidently proclaim: “Fortunately, there are commonly agreed, bold standards for evaluating the goodness of qualitative research in the academic research community. These standards are a part of what is generally called ‘scientific research.’ ”

Interpretation In Qualitative Research: What, Why, How

2020 ◽  
pp. 955-982
Author(s):  
Allen Trent ◽  
Jeasik Cho
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Qualitative Inquiry ◽  
The Self ◽  
Validity Evidence ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Interpretive Strategies

This chapter addresses a wide range of concepts related to interpretation in qualitative research, examines the meaning and importance of interpretation in qualitative inquiry, and explores the ways methodology, data, and the self/researcher as instrument interact and impact interpretive processes. Additionally, the chapter presents a series of strategies for qualitative researchers engaged in the process of interpretation and closes by presenting a framework for qualitative researchers designed to inform their interpretations. The framework includes attention to the key qualitative research concepts transparency, reflexivity, analysis, validity, evidence, and literature. Four questions frame the chapter: What is interpretation, and why are interpretive strategies important in qualitative research? How do methodology, data, and the researcher/self impact interpretation in qualitative research? How do qualitative researchers engage in the process of interpretation? And, in what ways can a framework for interpretation strategies support qualitative researchers across multiple methodologies and paradigms?

scholarly journals Do It for the Culture: The Case for Memes in Qualitative Research

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 160940692110258
Author(s):  
Constance Iloh
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Qualitative Inquiry ◽  
Cultural Relevance ◽  
Prominent Feature ◽  
Rapport Building ◽  
Everyday Communication ◽  
Remote Data

Memes are a prominent feature of global life in the 21st century. The author asserts that memes are significant to current and future qualitative research. In particular, the text establishes memes as: (a) part of everyday communication, expression, and explanation, thus useful in qualitative research; (b) valuable cultural units and symbols; (c) forms of rapport building and cultivating relational research; (d) approaches that bolster and sustain remote data collection; (e) methods that infuse agency, humor, and creativity into the research process. The author then showcases distinctive ways memes can be effectively incorporated in qualitative research pursuits and publications. The article concludes with the necessity of data collection and representation approaches that advance the meaningfulness and cultural-relevance of qualitative inquiry.

The Power of Constructivist Grounded Theory for Critical Inquiry

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathy Charmaz
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Grounded Theory ◽  
Qualitative Inquiry ◽  
Methodological Individualism ◽  
Constructivist Grounded Theory ◽  
Critical Inquiry ◽  
Critical Questions

The pragmatist roots of constructivist grounded theory make it a useful method for pursuing critical qualitative inquiry. Pragmatism offers ways to think about critical qualitative inquiry; constructivist grounded theory offers strategies for doing it. Constructivist grounded theory fosters asking emergent critical questions throughout inquiry. This method also encourages (a) interrogating the taken-for-granted methodological individualism pervading much of qualitative research and (b) taking a deeply reflexive stance called methodological self-consciousness, which leads researchers to scrutinize their data, actions, and nascent analyses. The article outlines how to put constructivist grounded theory into practice and ends with where this practice could take us.

Peran Lembaga Pemberdayaan Ekonomi Mustahik Baznas Dalam Meningkatkan Kesejahteraan Ekonomi Mustahik

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 477-494
Author(s):  
Ali Idrus ◽  
Ade Maman
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Small And Medium Enterprises ◽  
Business Development ◽  
Economic Welfare ◽  
Descriptive Data ◽  
Medium Enterprises

One of the solutions proposed by Badan Amil Zakat Nasional is to form Lembaga Pemberdayaan Ekonomi Mustahik which has the task of improving the quality of life of mustahik through its programs. So, the purpose of this study is to find out how the role of Lembaga Pemberdayaan Ekonomi Mustahik Badan Amil Zakat Nasional in improving the economic welfare of mustahik. This study uses qualitative research methods that produce descriptive data. Where this research is based on observations made by the author and then explained according to what the author observed in the field. The data collection that the researchers did was using the method of observation, documentary interviews, and other data. When the data has been collected, the researcher conducts an analysis and then draws conclusions from the analysis. The results of this study are Lembaga Pemberdayaan Ekonomi Mustahik BAZNAS plays a role in the development of micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) and focuses on potential creative businesses, empowers by providing business development capital assistance, in accordance with the budget draft proposed by mustahik, and approved by LPEM BAZNAS. Keywords: The Role of LPEM BAZNAS, Mustahik's Economic Welfare

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document