Praiseworthy pragmatism? Validity and action research

Journal of Advanced Nursing

Volumn 44, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 120-127

  Hope, Kevin W ^a   Waterman, Heather A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Action research; Nursing; Pragmatism; Research methods; Validity

Indexed keywords

CONCEPT FORMATION; ETHICS; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; REVIEW; SCHOOL; VALIDATION PROCESS; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; NURSING METHODOLOGY RESEARCH; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARD;

DATA COLLECTION; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; NURSING METHODOLOGY RESEARCH; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 0142197070     PISSN: 03092402     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02777.x     Document Type: Review

References (47)

1. Avis M. (1995) Valid arguments: a consideration of the concept of validity in establishing the credibility of research findings. Journal of Advanced Nursing 22, 1203-1209.
2. Clarke J., Dudley P., Edwards A., Rowland S., Ryan C. & Winter R. (1993) Ways of presenting and critiquing action research reports. Educational Action Research 1, 3, 490-491.
3. Dreyfus S.E. (1981) Formal Models vs. Human Situational Understanding: Inherent Limitations on the Modelling of Business Enterprise. Mimeo. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Schloss, Laxenburg, Austria.
4. Duffy M. (1985) Designing nursing research: the qualitative-quantitative debate. Journal of Advanced Nursing 10, 225-232.
5. Eden C. & Huxham C. (1993) Distinguishing Action Research. Working paper 93/18. Paper presented at the British Academy of Management Conference, September 1993, Milton Keynes, UK.
6. Elliott J. (1991) Action Research for Educational Change. Open University Press, Buckingham, UK.
7. Field P.A. & Morse J.A. (1985) Nursing Research: The Application of Qualitative Research. Croom Helm, London.
8. Fossey E., Harvey C., McDermott F. & Davidson L. (2002) Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 36, 717-732.
9. Gergen M.M. & Gergen K.J. (2000) Qualitative inquiry. Tensions and transformations. In The Handbook of Qualitative Research (Denzin N. & Lincoln Y., eds), 2nd edn, Sage, Beverley Hills, CA, pp. 1025-1046.
10. Greenwood J. (1994) Action research: a few details a caution and something new. Journal of Advanced Nursing 20, 13-18.
11. Guba E.G. & Lincoln Y.S. (1994) Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In The Handbook of Qualitative Research (Denzin N. & Lincoln Y., eds), Sage, Beverley Hills, CA, pp. 105-117.
12. Hammersley M. (1992) What's Wrong with Ethnography? Routledge, London.
13. Hart E. (1996) Action research as a professionalizing strategy: issues and dilemmas. Journal of Advanced Nursing 23, 454-461.
14. Hart E. & Bond M. (1995) Action Research for Health and Social Care. Open University Press, Milton Keynes.
15. Heron J. (1996) Co-Operative Inquiry: Research into the Human Condition. Sage, London.
16. Holter I.M. & Schwartz-Barcott D. (1993) Action research: what is it? How has it been used and how can it be used in nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing 18, 298-304.
17. Kemmis S. (2001) Exploring the relevance of critical theory for action research: emancipatory action research in the footsteps of Jürgen Habermas. In Handbook of Action Research Participative Inquiry and Practice (Reason P. & Bradbury H., eds), Sage, London, pp. 91-102.
18. Kemmis S. & McTaggart R. (2000) Participatory action research. In The Handbook of Qualitative Research (Denzin N. & Lincoln Y., eds), 2nd edn, Sage, Beverley Hills, CA, pp. 567-606.
19. Koch T. & Harrington A. (1998) Reconceptualizing rigour: the case for reflexivity. Journal of Advanced Nursing 28, 882-890.
20. Lather P. (1986) Issues of validity in openly ideological research: between a rock and a soft place. Interchange 17, 63-84.
21. Lewin K. (1948) Resolving Social Conflicts: Selected Papers on Group Dynamics by Kurt Lewin. Harper and Brothers, New York.
22. Lincoln Y.S. & Denzin N.K. (1994) The fifth moment. In The Handbook of Qualitative Research (Denzin N. & Lincoln Y., eds), Sage, Beverley Hills, CA, pp. 575-586.
23. Lincoln Y.S. & Guba E.G. (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage, Beverley Hills, CA.
24. Meyer J.E. (1993) New paradigm research in practice: the trials and tribulations of action research. Journal of Advanced Nursing 18, 1066-1072.
25. Meyer J. & Batehup L. (1997) Action research in health care practice: nature, present concerns and future possibilities. Nursing Times Research 2, 175-184.
26. Miles M.B. & Huberman A.M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis. Sage, New York.
27. Moher D., Schulz K.F. & Altman G. (2001) The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. The Lancet 357, 1191-1194.
28. Newman J. (1998) Validity: does the concept have a place in action research? http://www.userandaracom/~jnewman/validityhtml. Accessed December 1998.
29. Popay J., Rogers A. & Williams G. (1998) Rationale and standards for the systematic review of qualitative literature in health services research. Qualitative Health Research 8, 341-51.
30. Pope C., Ziebland S. & Mays N. (2000) Qualitative research in health care: analysing qualitative data. British Medical Journal 320, 114-116.
31. Reason, P. & Bradbury H. (eds) (2001) Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice. Sage, London.
32. Rolfe G. (1996) Going to extremes: action research grounded practice and the theory-practice gap in nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing 24, 1315-1320.
33. Sandelowski M. (1986) The problem of rigor in qualitative research. Advances in Nursing Science 8, 27-37.
34. Sandelowski M. (1993) Rigor or rigor mortis: the problems of rigor in qualitative research revisited. Advances in Nursing Science 16, 1-8.
35. Sandelowski M. & Barroso J. (2002) Reading qualitative studies. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 1 (1), Article 5. Retrieved 1.5.03 from http://www.ualberta.ca/~ijqm/.
36. Schwandt T. (1996) Farewell to criteriology. Qualitative Inquiry 2, 58-72.
37. Smith J.K. & Deemer D.K. (2000) The problem of criteria in the age of relativism. In The Handbook of Qualitative Research (Denzin N. & Lincoln Y., eds), 2nd edn, Sage, Beverley Hills, CA, pp. 877-895.
38. Smith J. & Hershusius L. (1986) Closing down the conversation: the end of the quantitative-qualitative debate among educational enquirers. Educational Research 15, 4-12.
39. Somekh B. (1995) The contribution of action research to development in social endeavours. British Educational Research Journal 21, 339-355.
40. Stringer E.T. (1996) Action Research: A Handbook for Practitioners. Sage, Beverley Hills, CA.
41. Susman G.I. & Evered R.D. (1978) An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Administrative Science Quarterly 23, 582-603.
42. Titchen A. (1995) Issues of validity in action research. Nurse Researcher 2, 38-48.
43. Wallis S. (1998) Changing practice through action research. Nurse Researcher 6, 5-15.
44. Waterman H. (1998) Embracing ambiguities and valuing ourselves: issues of validity in action research. Journal of Advanced Nursing 28, 101-105.
45. Waterman H., Webb C. & Williams A. (1995) Parallels and contradictions in the theory and practice of action research and nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing 32, 779-784.
46. Waterman H., Tillen D., Dickson R. & de Konig K. (2001) Action research: a systematic review and guidance for assessment. Health Technology Assessment 5(23), iii-157.
47. Whitmore E. (1994) To tell the truth: working with oppressed groups in participative approaches to inquiry. In Participation in Human Inquiry (Reason P., ed.), Sage, London.