scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Ian Alexander

Bio: Ian Alexander is an academic researcher. The author has contributed to research in topics: Empirical process (process control model) & Extreme programming practices. The author has an hindex of 5, co-authored 8 publications receiving 7977 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, an introduction to qualitative research is presented, with an emphasis on the use of qualitative research in the context of information systems, and an overview of the methods used.
Abstract: (2000). An introduction to qualitative research. European Journal of Information Systems: Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 127-128.

6,912 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This book is a tremendous piece of work: scholarly, concise, even-handed and admirably wide-ranging, and seems on the whole to be more about research and researchers than about action.
Abstract: (2001). Handbook of Action Research Participative Inquiry and Practice. European Journal of Information Systems: Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 176-177.

1,317 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This is a slim, quiet, slightly academic book that somehow manages to bring some airy theoretical concepts to life, and to recommend simple and practical ways of using the ideas to obtain better requirements.
Abstract: A Crabtree, Springer-Verlag; Berlin; 2003. 178 pp. ISBN 1-85233-718-4This is a slim, quiet, slightly academic book that somehow manages to bring some airy theoretical concepts to life, and to recom...

143 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The book consists of papers collected from interdisciplinary forums held at Berkeley and discusses knowledge and organisation, with a theme that runs strongly through many of the chapters is tacit knowledge.
Abstract: (2001). Managing Industrial Knowledge; Creation, Transfer and Utilization. European Journal of Information Systems: Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 181-181.

21 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a sample of PhD studies using qualitative approaches, and qualitative interviews as the method of data collection was taken from theses.com and contents analysed for their sample sizes.
Abstract: A number of issues can affect sample size in qualitative research; however, the guiding principle should be the concept of saturation. This has been explored in detail by a number of authors but is still hotly debated, and some say little understood. A sample of PhD studies using qualitative approaches, and qualitative interviews as the method of data collection was taken from theses.com and contents analysed for their sample sizes. Five hundred and sixty studies were identified that fitted the inclusion criteria. Results showed that the mean sample size was 31; however, the distribution was non-random, with a statistically significant proportion of studies, presenting sample sizes that were multiples of ten. These results are discussed in relation to saturation. They suggest a pre-meditated approach that is not wholly congruent with the principles of qualitative research.

3,262 citations

01 Jan 2005
TL;DR: The history of qualitative research in the human disciplines can be traced back to the 1970s and 1980s, when the very existence of qualitative work was at issue as mentioned in this paper, when the evidence-based research movement, with its fixed standards and guidelines for conducting and evaluating qualitative inquiry, sought total domination.
Abstract: The global community of qualitative researchers is midway between two extremes, searching for a new middle, moving in several different directions at the same time. Mixed methodologies and calls for scientifically based research, on the one side, renewed calls for social justice inquiry from the critical social science tradition on the other. In the methodological struggles of the 1970s and 1980s, the very existence of qualitative research was at issue. In the new paradigm war, “every overtly social justice-oriented approach to research . . . is threatened with de-legitimization by the government-sanctioned, exclusivist assertion of positivism . . . as the ‘gold standard’ of educational research” (Wright, 2006, pp. 799–800). The evidence-based research movement, with its fixed standards and guidelines for conducting and evaluating qualitative inquiry, sought total domination: one shoe fits all (Cannella & Lincoln, Chapter 5, this volume; Lincoln, 2010). The heart of the matter turns on issues surrounding the politics and ethics of evidence and the value of qualitative work in addressing matters of equity and social justice (Torrance, Chapter 34, this volume). In this introductory chapter, we define the field of qualitative research, then navigate, chart, and review the history of qualitative research in the human disciplines. This will allow us to locate this handbook and its contents within their historical moments. (These historical moments are somewhat artificial; they are socially constructed, quasi-historical, and overlapping conventions. Nevertheless, they permit a “performance” of developing ideas. They also facilitate an increasing sensitivity to and sophistication about the pitfalls and promises of ethnography and qualitative research.) A conceptual framework for reading the qualitative research act as a multicultural, gendered process is presented. We then provide a brief introduction to the chapters, concluding with a brief discussion of qualitative research. We will also discuss the threats to qualitative human-subject research from the methodological conservatism movement, which was noted in our Preface. As indicated there, we use the metaphor of the bridge to structure what follows. This volume provides a bridge between historical moments, politics, the decolonization project, research methods, paradigms, and communities of interpretive scholars.

3,131 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This description of qualitative content analysis offers one approach that shows how the general principles of the method can be used and four distinct main stages are described: the decontextualisation, the recontextualization, the categorization, and the compilation.

2,368 citations

MonographDOI
01 Jan 1999
TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss why quality matters, trust, truth and philosophy guiding Ideals, and convergence on a point? Accounting for Contradiction Grounding Theory Generalising from Qualitative Research Using Numbers Reliability and Replicability Reflexivity and Writing Reinstating the Author
Abstract: PART ONE: GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS Why Quality Matters Post Scientific Critiques Trust, Truth and Philosophy Guiding Ideals PART TWO: RESEARCH PRACTICE Converging on a Point? Accounting for Contradiction Grounding Theory Generalising from Qualitative Research Using Numbers Reliability and Replicability Reflexivity and Writing Reinstating the Author

2,207 citations

Book
01 Jan 2013
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present an overview of CBPR methods in community-based participatory research for health and discuss the role of focus groups in the development of these methods.
Abstract: Figures and Tables. Foreword (David Satcher). Acknowledgments. The Editors. The Contributors. PART ONE: INTRODUCTION TO METHODS IN COMMUNITY-BASED PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH FOR HEALTH. 1. Introduction to Methods in Community-Based Participatory Research for Health (Barbara A. Israel, Eugenia Eng, Amy J. Schulz, and Edith A. Parker). PART TWO: PARTNERSHIP FORMATION AND MAINTENANCE. 2. Developing and Maintaining Partnerships with Communities (Nina Wallerstein, Bonnie Duran, Meredith Minkler, and Kevin Foley). 3. Strategies and Techniques for Effective Group Process in CBPR Partnerships (Adam B. Becker, Barbara A. Israel, and Alex J. Allen III). PART THREE: COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT AND DIAGNOSIS. 4. Insiders and Outsiders Assess Who Is "The Community": Participant Observation, Key Informant Interview, Focus Group Interview, and Community Forum (Eugenia Eng, Karen Strazza Moore, Scott D. Rhodes, Derek M. Griffith, Leo L. Allison, Kate Shirah, and Elvira M. Mebane). PART FOUR: DEFINITION OF THE ISSUE. 5. CBPR Approach to Survey Design and Implementation: The Healthy Environments Partnership Survey (Amy J. Schulz, Shannon N. Zenk, Srimathi Kannan, Barbara A. Israel, Mary A. Koch, and Carmen A. Stokes). 6. Using a CBPR Approach to Develop an Interviewer Training Manual with Members of the Apsaalooke Nation (Suzanne Christopher, Linda Burhansstipanov, and Alma Knows His Gun-McCormick). 7. The Application of Focus Group Methodologies to Community-Based Participatory Research (Edith C. Kieffer, Yamir Salabarria-Pena, Angela M. Odoms-Young, Sharla K. Willis, Kelly E. Baber, and J. Ricardo Guzman). 8. Application of CBPR in the Design of an Observational Tool: The Neighborhood Observational Checklist (Shannon N. Zenk, Amy J. Schulz, James S. House, Alison Benjamin, and Srimathi Kannan). 9. Mapping Social and Environmental Influences on Health: A Community Perspective (Guadalupe X. Ayala, Siobhan C. Maty, Altha J. Cravey, and Lucille H. Webb). 10. Community-Based Participatory Research and Ethnography: The Perfect Union (Chris McQuiston, Emilio A. Parrado, Julio Cesar Olmos-Muniz, and Alejandro M. Bustillo Martinez). 11. What's with the Wheezing? Methods Used by the Seattle-King County Healthy Homes Project to Assess Exposure to Indoor Asthma Triggers (James Krieger, Carol A. Allen, John W. Roberts, Lisa Carol Ross, and Tim K. Takaro). PART FIVE: DOCUMENTATION AND EVALUATION OF PARTNERSHIPS. 12. Documentation and Evaluation of CBPR Partnerships: In-Depth Interviews and Closed-Ended Questionnaires (Barbara A. Israel, Paula M. Lantz, Robert J. McGranaghan, Diana L. Kerr, and J. Ricardo Guzman). PART SIX: FEEDBACK, INTERPRETATION, DISSEMINATION, AND APPLICATION OF RESULTS. 13. Developing and Implementing Guidelines for Dissemination: The Experience of the Community Action Against Asthma Project (Edith A. Parker, Thomas G. Robins, Barbara A. Israel, Wilma Brakefield-Caldwell, Katherine K. Edgren, and Donele J. Wilkins). 14. Creating Understanding and Action Through Group Dialogue (Elizabeth A. Baker and Freda L. Motton). 15. Photovoice as a Community-Based Participatory Research Method: A Case Study with African American Breast Cancer Survivors in Rural Eastern North Carolina (Ellen D. S. Lopez, Eugenia Eng, Naomi Robinson, and Caroline C. Wang). 16. Policy Analysis and Advocacy: An Approach to Community-Based Participatory Research (Nicholas Freudenberg, Marc A. Rogers, Cassandra Ritas, and Sister Mary Nerney). 17. Citizens, Science, and Data Judo: Leveraging Secondary Data Analysis to Build a Community-Academic Collaborative for Environmental Justice in Southern California 371 Rachel Morello-Frosch, Manuel Pastor Jr., James L. Sadd, Carlos Porras, and Michele Prichard APPENDIXES. A. Instructions for Conducting a Force Field Analysis (Adam B. Becker, Barbara A. Israel, and Alex J. Allen III). B. Community Member Key Informant Interview Guide (Eugenia Eng, Karen Strazza Moore, Scott D. Rhodes, Derek M. Griffith, Leo L. Allison, Kate Shirah, and Elvira M. Mebane). C. Selected New and Revised Items Included in the HEP Survey After Input from the Steering Committee or Survey Subcommittee (SC), Focus Group Themes (FG), or Pilot Testing (PT) of Existing Items (Amy J. Schulz, Shannon N. Zenk, Srimathi Kannan, Barbara A. Israel, Mary A. Koch, and Carmen A. Stokes). D. Selected HEP Measures by Survey Categories, with Sources and Scale Items (Amy J. Schulz, Shannon N. Zenk, Srimathi Kannan, Barbara A. Israel, Mary A. Koch, and Carmen A. Stokes). E. Healthy Environments Partnership: Neighborhood Observational Checklist (Shannon N. Zenk, Amy J. Schulz, James S. House, Alison Benjamin, and Srimathi Kannan). F. Field Notes Guide (Chris McQuiston, Emilio A. Parrado, Julio Cesar Olmos, and Alejandro M. Bustillo Martinez). G. Detroit Community-Academic Urban Research Center: In-Depth, Semistructured Interview Protocol for Board Evaluation, 1996-2002 (Barbara A. Israel, Paula M. Lantz, Robert J. McGranaghan, Diana L. Kerr, and J. Ricardo Guzman). H. Detroit Community-Academic Urban Research Center: Closed-Ended Survey Questionnaire for Board Evaluation, 1997-2002 (Barbara A. Israel, Paula M. Lantz, Robert J. McGranaghan, Diana L. Kerr, and J. Ricardo Guzman). I. Philosophy and Guiding Principles for Dissemination of Findings of the Michigan Center for the Environment and Children's Health (MCECH) Including Authorship of Publications and Presentations, Policies and Procedures, Access to Data, and Related Matters (Edith A. Parker, Thomas G. Robins, Barbara A. Israel, Wilma Brakefield-Caldwell, Katherine K. Edgren, and Donele J. Wilkins). J. Community Action Against Asthma: Fact Sheet on "Particulate Matter" (Edith A. Parker, Thomas G. Robins, Barbara A. Israel, Wilma Brakefield-Caldwell, Katherine K. Edgren, and Donele J. Wilkins). K. Community Action Against Asthma: Summary of Air Sampling Data in Your Community and Home, 2000-2001 (Edith A. Parker, Thomas G. Robins, Barbara A. Israel, Wilma Brakefield-Caldwell, Katherine K. Edgren, and Donele J. Wilkins). L. The Planning Grant: In-Depth Group Interview Protocol: Questions for Community and Coalition Members (Elizabeth A. Baker and Freda L. Motton). M. Inspirational Images Project: Fact Sheet and Informed Consent Form for Study Participants (Ellen D. S. Lopez, Eugenia Eng, Naomi Robinson, and Caroline C. Wang). N. Inspirational Images Project: Consent for Adults Who May Appear in Photographs (Ellen D. S. Lopez, Eugenia Eng, Naomi Robinson, and Caroline C. Wang). O. Community Reintegration Network: Policy Report-Coming Back to Harlem from Jail or Prison: One-Way or Round-Trip (Nicholas Freudenberg, Marc A. Rogers, Cassandra Ritas, and Sister Mary Nerney). P. Southern California Environmental Justice Collaborative (the Collaborative): Partnership Agreed upon Mechanism for Deciding on Research Activities (Communities for a Better Environment, Liberty Hill Foundation, and The Research Team). Name Index. Subject Index.

1,647 citations