Evaluating goodness in qualitative researcher

Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 11-20

  Qazi, Hammad Ali ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; DATA ANALYSIS; DATA COLLECTION METHOD; DATA SYNTHESIS; EVALUATION RESEARCH; HEALTH SCIENCE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MEDICAL RESEARCH; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; QUALITY CONTROL; QUANTITATIVE STUDY; REVIEW; SAMPLING; STANDARDIZATION; STUDY DESIGN; SYSTEMATIC ERROR;

EID: 79959954732     PISSN: 22234721     EISSN: 20760299     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3329/bjms.v10i1.7314     Document Type: Review

References (55)

1. Whittemore R, Chase SK, Mandle CL. Validity in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research 2001; 11(4): 522-37. doi:10.1177/104973201129119299. PMid:11521609.
2. Ballinger C. Demonstrating rigor and quality. In L. Finlay & C. Ballinger (Eds.), Qualitative research for allied health professionals: Challenging choices. West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons; 2006. P. 235-46.
3. Denzin NK & Lincoln YS. Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1994.
4. Elliot R, Fischer CT & Rennie DL. Evolving guidelines for publication of qualitative research in psychology and related fields. British Journal of Clinical Psychology 1999; 38(3): 215-29. doi:10.1348/014466599162782. PMid:10532145.
5. Elliot R. Therapy process research and clinical practice: Practical strategies: In M. Aveline& D.L. Shapiro (Eds.). Research foundation for psychotherapy practice. Chihester: Wiley; 1995. P. 49-72.
6. Merriam SB. Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San Francisco: Jossey Bass; 1988.
7. Schwandt TA. Farewell to Criteriology. Qualitative Inquiry 1996; 2(1): 58-72. doi:10.1177/107780049600200109.
8. Morse JM, Barrett M, Mayan M, Olson K. & Spiers J. Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2002; 1(2): 13-22.
9. Van Manen M. Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy. Ontario: Althouse; 1990.
10. Smith J. After the Demise of Empiricism: The Problem of Judging Social and Educational Inquiry. Norwood: Albex; 1993.
11. Denzin N & LincolnY. (Eds.). Handbook of qualitative research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2000.
12. Lincoln YS. Emerging criteria for qualitative and interpretive research. Qualitative Inquiry 1995; 3: 275-89. doi:10.1177/107780049500100301.
13. Morrow SL & Smith ML. Qualitative research for counseling psychology. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology.3rd ed. New York: Wiley; 2000. P. 199-230.
14. Sandelowski M & Barroso J. Reading qualitative studies. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 2002; 1(1): 74-108.
15. Van Maanen J. (1995). Representation in Ethnography. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1995.
16. Smith JK & Deemer DK. The Problem of Criteria in the Age of Relativism. In N.K. Denzin& Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2000. P. 877-96.
17. McCracken GD. The Long Interview. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1988.
18. Peck E & Seeker E. Quality criteria for qualitative research: does context make a difference? Qualitative Health Research 1999; 9(4): 552-8. doi:10.1177/104973299129121965.
19. Altheide DL & Johnson JM. Criteria for assessing interpretive validity in qualitative research. In N.K. Denzin& Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1994. P. 485-99.
20. Leininger M. Evaluation criteria and critique of qualitative research studies. In J. Morse (Eds.), Critical Issues in Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 1994.
21. Morse JM. Myth 93: Reliability and validity are not relevant to qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry 1999; 9: 717-8.
22. Mays N & Pope C. Qualitative research in health care: Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ 2000; 320(7226): 50-2. doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7226.50. PMid:10617534. PMCid:1117321.
23. Lincoln, YS & Guba EG. Naturalistic Inquiry. New bury Park, CA: Sage Publications; 1985.
24. Malterud K. Qualitative research: Standards, challenges and guidelines. Lancet 2001; 358: 483-8. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05627-6.
25. Arminio JL & Hultgren FH. Breaking out from the shadow: the question of criteria in qualitative research. Journal of College Student Development 2002;43(4):446-56.
26. Popay J, Rogers A & Williams G. Rationale and standards for the systematic review of qualitative literature in health services research. Qualitative Health Research 1998; 8(3), 341-51. doi:10.1177/104973239800800305. Mid:10558335.
27. Giacomini MK & Cook DJ. Users' guides to the medical literature: XXIII. Qualitative research in health care A. Are the result of the study valid? JAMA 2000; 284(3): 357-62. doi:10.1001/jama.284.3.357. PMid:10891968.
28. Britten N, Jones R, Murphy E & Stacy R. Qualitative research methods in general practice and primary care. Family Practice 1995; 12(1): 104-14. doi:10.1093/fampra/12.1.104. PMid:7665030.
29. Lincoln YS & Guba EG. Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin& Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research 2nd ed. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage; 2000. P. 163-88.
30. GassonS. Rigor in grounded theory research: An interpretive perspective on generating theory from qualitative field studies. In M. E. Whitman & A. B. Woszczynski (Eds.) The handbook of information systems research. Hershey, PA: Idea Group; 2004. P. 79-102. doi:10.4018/9781591401445.ch006.
31. Guba EG & Lincoln YS. Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1989.
32. Patton MQ. Qualitative research and evaluation methods3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2002.
33. Gallagher D. In search of the rightful role of method: reflections on conducting a qualitative dissertation. In T. Tiller, A. Sparks, S. Karhus& N. Dowling (Eds.) The Qualitative Challenge. Landas, Norway: Casper; 1995. P. 25-43.
34. Silverman D. Validity & Reliability. In D. Silverman (Eds.), Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook. London: Sage; 2000. P. 175-90.
35. Smith J. After the Demise of Empiricism: The Problem of Judging Social and Educational Inquiry. Norwood: Albex; 1993.
36. Aamodt AM. Examining ethnography for nurse researchers. Western Journal of Nursing Research 1982; 4(2): 209-21. doi:10.1177/019394598200400207. PMid:6919326.
37. Baker C, Wuest J & Stem PN. Method slurring: the grounded theory/phenomenology example. Journal of Advanced Nursing 1992; 17: 1355-60 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.1992.tb01859.x. PMid:1430643
38. Carboni J. A Rogerian process of inquiry. Nursing Science Quarterly 1995; 8: 22-37. doi:10.1177/089431849500800107. PMid:7877781.
39. Janesick VJ. The dance of qualitative research design: Metaphor, methodolatry and meaning. In N. K. Denzin& Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1994. P. 209-19.
40. Thorne S. The art (and science) of critiquing qualitative research. In J. M. Morse (Ed.), Completing a qualitative project: Details and dialogue. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1997. P. 117-32.
41. Sandelowski M. The problem of rigor in qualitative research. Advances in Nursing Science 1986; 8: 27-37. PMid:3083765.
42. Maxwell JA. Understanding and validity in qualitative research. Harvard Educational Review 1992; 62: 279-99.
43. Marshall C. Goodness criteria: Are they objective or judgment calls? In E. G. Guba (Eds.), The paradigm dialog. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1990. P. 188-97.
44. Ambert AM, Adler PA, Adler P & DetznerDF. Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. Journal of Marriage and the Family 1995; 57: 879-93. doi:10.2307/353409.
45. Geertz C. The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books; 1973.
46. Chapple A & Rogers A. Explicit guidelines for qualitative research: A step in the right direction, a defence of the "soft" option, or a form of sociological imperialism? Family Practice 1998; 15, 556-61. doi:10.1093/fampra/15.6.556. PMid:10078797.
47. Eisner E. The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practices. New York: Macmillan; 1991.
48. Patton MQ. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1990.
49. Eisenhart MA & Howe KR. Validity in educational research. In M. D. Le Compte, W. L. Millroy, & J. Preissle (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research in education. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 1992. P. 643-80.
50. Burns N. Standards for qualitative research. Nursing Science Quarterly 1989; 2: 44-52. doi:10.1177/089431848900200112. PMid:2927791.
51. Altheide DL & Johnson JM. Criteria for assessing interpretive validity in qualitative research. In N.K. Denzin& Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1994. P. 485-99.
52. Hammersley M. What's wrong with ethnography? Methodological exploration. London: Routledge; 1992.
53. Kahn, D. L. Ways of discussing validity in qualitative nursing research. Western Journal of Nursing Research 1993; 15: 122-6. doi:10.1177/019394599301500111. PMid:8421917.
54. Potter J & Wetherell M. Analyzing discourse. In A. Bryman& R.G. Burgess (Eds.), Analyzing qualitative data. London: Routledge; 1994. doi:10.4324/9780203413081_chapter_3.
55. Kvale S. Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1996.