scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
JournalISSN: 1609-4069

The International Journal of Qualitative Methods 

SAGE Publishing
About: The International Journal of Qualitative Methods is an academic journal published by SAGE Publishing. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Qualitative research & Participatory action research. It has an ISSN identifier of 1609-4069. It is also open access. Over the lifetime, 1255 publications have been published receiving 74593 citations. The journal is also known as: IJQM.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The process of conducting a thematic analysis is illustrated through the presentation of an auditable decision trail, guiding interpreting and representing textual data and exploring issues of rigor and trustworthiness.
Abstract: As qualitative research becomes increasingly recognized and valued, it is imperative that it is conducted in a rigorous and methodical manner to yield meaningful and useful results. To be accepted ...

9,963 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article used a hybrid process of inductive and deductive thematic analysis to interpret raw data in a doctoral study on the role of performance feedback in the self-assessment of nursing practice.
Abstract: In this article, the authors describe how they used a hybrid process of inductive and deductive thematic analysis to interpret raw data in a doctoral study on the role of performance feedback in the self-assessment of nursing practice. The methodological approach integrated data-driven codes with theory-driven ones based on the tenets of social phenomenology. The authors present a detailed exemplar of the staged process of data coding and identification of themes. This process demonstrates how analysis of the raw data from interview transcripts and organizational documents progressed toward the identification of overarching themes that captured the phenomenon of performance feedback as described by participants in the study.

7,521 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors argue that qualitative researchers should reclaim responsibility for reliability and validity by implementing verification strategies integral and self-correcting during the conduct of inquiry itself, which ensures the attainment of rigor using strategies inherent within each qualitative design, and moves the responsibility for incorporating and maintaining reliability and validation from external reviewers' judgements to the investigators themselves.
Abstract: The rejection of reliability and validity in qualitative inquiry in the 1980s has resulted in an interesting shift for "ensuring rigor" from the investigator’s actions during the course of the research, to the reader or consumer of qualitative inquiry. The emphasis on strategies that are implemented during the research process has been replaced by strategies for evaluating trustworthiness and utility that are implemented once a study is completed. In this article, we argue that reliability and validity remain appropriate concepts for attaining rigor in qualitative research. We argue that qualitative researchers should reclaim responsibility for reliability and validity by implementing verification strategies integral and self-correcting during the conduct of inquiry itself. This ensures the attainment of rigor using strategies inherent within each qualitative design, and moves the responsibility for incorporating and maintaining reliability and validity from external reviewers’ judgements to the investigators themselves. Finally, we make a plea for a return to terminology for ensuring rigor that is used by mainstream science.

4,980 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the core principles of a phenomenological research design and a specific study are discussed, and the data explicitation, by means of a simplified version of Hycner's (1999) process, is further explained.
Abstract: This article distills the core principles of a phenomenological research design and, by means of a specific study, illustrates the phenomenological methodology. After a brief overview of the developments of phenomenology, the research paradigm of the specific study follows. Thereafter the location of the data, the data-gathering the data-storage methods are explained. Unstructured in-depth phenomenological interviews supplemented by memoing, essays by participants, a focus group discussion and field notes were used. The data explicitation, by means of a simplified version of Hycner's (1999) process, is further explained. The article finally contains commentary about the validity and truthfulness measures, as well as a synopsis of the findings of the study.

2,342 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the essential similarities and differences between hermeneutic phenomenology and phenomenology from historical and methodological perspectives are discussed, considering the philosophical bases, assumptions, focus of research and research outcomes that differentiate these approaches.
Abstract: Hermeneutic phenomenology and phenomenology have become increasingly popular as research methodologies, yet confusion still exists about the unique aspects of these two methodologies. This article provides a discussion of the essential similarities and differences between hermeneutic phenomenology and phenomenology from historical and methodological perspectives. Consideration is given to the philosophical bases, assumptions, focus of research and research outcomes that differentiate these approaches.

2,064 citations

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Journal in previous years
YearPapers
2023131
2022202
2021175
2020135
2019116
201892