Topic
Qualitative research
About: Qualitative research is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 39957 publications have been published within this topic receiving 2390470 citations. The topic is also known as: Qualitative method.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: A more holistic view of the unique attributes of a qualitative paper for AMJ is offered, which will prove insightful not only for those researchers who have attempted to publish qualitative research in AMJ in the past, but also for those who may wish to do so for the first time in the future.
Abstract: Over the past six issues, our editorial team has presented a series on how to write effective AMJ submissions. Much of what this series has covered is relevant to both quantitative and qualitative papers. For example, the five criteria that Colquitt and George (June 2011 “From the Editors” [vol. 54: 432– 435]) identify for choosing topics—significance, novelty, curiosity, scope, and actionability—apply equally well to qualitative work. However, there are also key differences. For example, qualitative work does not typically suffer from the measurement, operationalization and model specification problems identified by Bono and McNamara (August 2011 “From the Editors” [vol. 54: 657–660]). As our opening quote illustrates, these differences are not always easy to articulate or explain. In this final FTE for the “Publishing in AMJ” series, we provide our perspective on the key differences. To do this, we focus our thoughts around this provocative question: If a colleague who has only ever published quantitative papers before asked you to identify the main differences between qualitative and quantitative papers (besides the type of data presented), how would you respond? We put this question to a panel of some of AMJ’s top qualitative authors and reviewers. We believe we hit a chord with this question, as we received 24 replies (from more than half of the people we contacted), a return that far exceeded our expectations. There was a range of responses from our colleagues; some felt the differences were stark, whereas others felt the differences were superficial. Rather than merely reporting back what they said, we synthesized their views (and sprinkled in some of the more revealing quotes) while bringing to bear our own experiences from the more than 180 decisions we have cast in our tenure as associate editors responsible for qualitative manuscripts. Instead of providing a point-by-point comparison with what has been written previously in the series (a result that would be too long and too tedious), we offer a more holistic view of the unique attributes of a qualitative paper for AMJ. In this way, an author who reads this editorial will receive helpful guidance on the writing process without having to read the other six pieces but could also find direct comparisons if reading the current FTE in conjunction with the previous six pieces. We illustrate our points from the many qualitative AMJ Best Article Award Winners. We hope this editorial will prove insightful not only for those researchers who have attempted to publish qualitative research in AMJ in the past, but also for those who may wish to do so for the first time in the future.
324 citations
••
TL;DR: In this article, the authors describe a UK-based longitudinal qualitative study following approximately 100 young people over 9 years, focusing on the value of a devolved research design, complementary cross-section and temporal analytic approaches and the effects of being involved in a longitudinal study on researchers and participants.
Abstract: This paper describes a UK based longitudinal qualitative study following approximately 100 young people over 9 years. It provides an overview of the research design, methods of data collection and analysis as well as reflecting on the strengths and weaknesses of the strategies employed. We focus on the value of a devolved research design, complementary cross-section and temporal analytic approaches and the effects of being involved in a longitudinal study on researchers and participants. The paper aims to contribute to a growing understanding of the practical, ethical and epistemological challenges presented by longitudinal qualitative methods, and highlights those challenges that are specific to this method as well as those which are amplified by this kind of approach.
324 citations
••
TL;DR: It is found that participants with different education conceptualised their involvement in decision making in diverse ways, and the important role of the patient-practitioner relationship in the process of decision making is highlighted.
324 citations
••
TL;DR: A taxonomy of mixed-methods designs has been proposed in this paper, but there is a lack of agreement regarding basic concepts and definitions, as is bemoaned by many experts in this field.
Abstract: Despite ongoing ‘paradigm wars’ between the methodological traditions of qualitative and quantitative research, ‘mixed methods’ represents nowadays a rapidly developing field of social science methodology. In such discussions it is often emphasized that the use of methods should be predominantly influenced by substantive research questions, and not only by methodological and epistemological considerations. As all methods have specific limitations as well as particular strengths, many discussants propose that qualitative and quantitative methods should be combined in order to compensate for their mutual and overlapping weaknesses. However, although a variety of proposals have been made for a taxonomy of mixed-methods designs, there is yet a lack of agreement regarding basic concepts and definitions, as is bemoaned by many experts in this field. This lack of common ground is due to the fact that crucial questions regarding the relations between research domains and methods have been not sufficiently discuss...
324 citations
••
TL;DR: The author describes steps that she and a colleague took to ensure the validity and accuracy of the findings in a qualitative study of female sex workers and describes two unexpected and serendipitous validity checks that served as affirmation.
Abstract: In this article, the author takes up the debate about the usefulness of the concept of validity in qualitative research and acknowledges the critical role of the researcher as an "instrument" in the research process. Qualitative research, and the process of analysis in particular, involves continuous reflexivity and self-scrutiny. Balancing the need for creativity and rigor, the qualitative researcher can experience uncertainty, particularly in relation to small numbers. The author describes steps that she and a colleague took to ensure the validity and accuracy of the findings in a qualitative study of female sex workers. She discusses specific challenges in relation to the validity of their interpretation and describes two unexpected and serendipitous validity checks that served as affirmation.
323 citations