Establishing rigour in qualitative radiography research

The purpose of this paper is discussing the main issues in conceptualizing reliability and validity between qualitative and quantitative research approaches. The researcher examined the arguments about validity and reliability in inquiry methodology and identified three main debates primarily in qualitative research. The first one was about qualitative inquirers’ limited emphasis on the data collection process to increase the robustness of their research efforts. Most of the strategies in qualitative research (e.g. peer debriefing, member check, audit trail) are used after completing the data collection procedures. Another important discussion in social inquiry was about what valid research means in qualitative paradigm. There are various interpretations of what validity is in qualitative research. This is due to epistemological grounds of qualitative research. Qualitative research does not accept a single truth. Reality is not fixed in qualitative research. It is concerned with cooperation of the multiple constructed realities to reach the contextual truth. The third debate reported in the literature was the discussion about reliability in qualitative research. It is evident that replication of any qualitative methods will not release the same results due to changing contextual conditions. Even though reliability has a long history in inquiry methodology discussions, some qualitative inquirers claim that reliability is not an appropriate concept for qualitative inquiry.

Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research in Cross-Cultural Psychology

Qualitative and mixed methods research in trials

Introduction: <br/>The credibility of qualitative research has long been debated, with critics emphasizing the lack of rigor and the challenges of demonstrating it. In qualitative research, rigor encompasses explicit, detailed descriptions of various research stages, including problem framing, study design, data collection, analysis, and reporting. The diversity inherent in qualitative research, originating from various beliefs and paradigms, challenges establishing universal guidelines for determining its rigor. Additionally, researchers' often unrecorded thought processes in qualitative studies further complicate the assessment of research quality.<br/><br/>Methods:<br/>To address these concerns, this article builds on the TACT framework, which was developed to teach postgraduate students and those new to qualitative research to identify and apply rigorous principles and indicators in qualitative research. The research reported in this article focuses on creating a scale designed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the TACT framework. This involves analyzing the stability of its dimensions and understanding its effectiveness as a tool for teaching and research.<br/><br/>Results: <br/>The study's findings indicate that the TACT framework, when assessed through the newly developed scale, exhibits stable dimensions consistent with rigorous qualitative research principles. The framework effectively guides postgraduate students and new researchers in assessing the rigor of qualitative research processes and outcomes.<br/><br/>Discussion:<br/>The application of the TACT framework and its evaluation scale reveals several insights. Firstly, it demonstrates the framework's utility in bridging the gap in pedagogical tools for teaching rigor in qualitative research methods. Secondly, it highlights the framework's potential in providing a structured approach to undertaking qualitative research, which is essential given this field's diverse methodologies and paradigms. However, the TACT framework remains a guide to enhancing rigor in qualitative research throughout all the various phases but by no means a measure of rigor.<br/><br/>Conclusion:<br/>In conclusion, the TACT framework and its accompanying evaluative scale represent significant steps toward standardizing and enhancing the rigor of qualitative research, particularly for postgraduate students and early career researchers. While it does not solve all challenges associated with obtaining and demonstrating rigor in qualitative research, it provides a valuable tool for assessing and ensuring research quality, thereby addressing some of the longstanding criticisms of the quality of research obtained through qualitative methods.

Attention to rigour, from the identification of the problem to the dissemination of the findings, is essential in all qualitative research. In this paper, research carried out in Ghana in 1999 is used to highlight methodological issues in relation to rigour in international qualitative nursing research. The purpose of this paper is to review the literature in relation to rigour in qualitative research, highlight the methodological decisions enhancing rigour during this research project, and describe the criteria used to assess rigour during the research process. A participatory action research design was used to explore the cultural, social, economic, and political factors that influenced Ghanaian women's vulnerability to HIV infection. Collaboration with participants and partnerships with key professionals were integral to the design of the study. Participatory action research provided a flexible, socially, and culturally adaptable framework to guide this international research project. Prior to the initiation of international research it was essential to establish the relevance and feasibility of the proposed project. This international research project posed additional methodological challenges to the establishment of rigour. Patience, flexibility and sensitivity were required of the researcher to overcome these challenges. Collaboration with participants and with culture-specific 'experts' may be key to culturally competent scholarship, particularly in unfamiliar settings.

The purpose of this focused issue is to advance understanding of qualitative research methods in the international business context. Debates on qualitative research methods in the key international business (IB) journals have been rare. There has been no focused issue on this topic previously, either in mir or in other journals in the field, making this a 'special' issue. During the process of editing a recent handbook on qualitative research methods (Marschan-Piekkari/Welch 2004), we realized that while this collection covered many topics, often for the first time in the IB field, there were many others still outstanding. There was thus scope for continuing a dialogue about qualitative methods in the IB research community. The challenge of making qualitative research count in the quantitative world of IB remains. Qualitative research is difficult to define, since the term encompasses many different research traditions, research strategies and methods for data collection and analysis (Prasad 2005). A typical definition is that everything non-numerical is qualitative research (Marschan-Piekkari/Welch 2004, p. 19). However, even this very simplistic definition soon breaks down, since research strategies which are typically considered to be qualitative, such as case studies, can combine numerical with non-numerical data (Hurmerinta-Peltomaki/Nummela 2004). There is also no clear divide between qualitative and quantitative research in terms of research traditions, with much qualitative research in management and IB sharing the positivist assumptions of quantitative research (Prasad/Prasad 2002). This focused issue is not about reporting the empirical findings of IB studies applying qualitative methods; rather it is about the process of undertaking qualitative research in the IB field. Of course, there is a large volume of literature on qualitative research methods already. However, we would argue that the IB context warrants special treatment. As the authors of this focused issue discuss, the distinctiveness of the field stems from its multiple linguistic and cultural settings; organizational complexity; and its intellectual roots in post-War academic institutions in the USA. These issues receive little treatment in general texts on qualitative methodology. There has been some methodological debate in previous issues of mir. Earlier articles in mircan be grouped into three categories: first, reviews of existing methodological practices in IB publications (e.g., Cavusgil/Das 1997, Nasif et al. 1991); second, proposals for new quantitative techniques (e.g., the use of key informants in cross-cultural studies, as proposed by Lenartowicz and Roth 2004 and a linguistic-based measure of cultural distance as developed by West and Graham 2004); and third, calls for new methodological approaches (Boddewyn/Iyer 1999). The absence of qualitative research methods in this debate perhaps reflects the limited amount of empirical qualitative research published in this journal. A recent analysis of mir issues between 1990 and 1999 revealed that only 5 percent of articles published in this period used qualitative methods (Welch/Welch 2004). This focused issue is therefore a response to those, such as Boddewyn and Iyer (1999) in this journal, who have called for alternatives to surveys and secondary data analysis. This focused issue attracted 39 submissions from more than 15 countries. Given that there have been limited outlets for methodological articles in IB, this is a considerable number. It perhaps suggests a level of interest to which IB journals have not responded to date. Of the total number of submissions, 11 were selected for review. On the basis of reviewers' comments, six of these papers were ultimately rejected. The final five papers underwent two and, in some cases, up to four rounds of revisions. In selecting the articles, we used the following criteria: appropriateness of the topic for the focused issue; demonstrated knowledge of IB and methodological literature; quality of argument; originality and innovativeness of the contribution to IB methodology; organization and clarity of the paper; and potential application to research practice in IB. …

Issues are still raised even now in the 21st century by the persistent concern with achieving rigor in qualitative research. There is also a continuing debate about the analogous terms reliability and validity in naturalistic inquiries as opposed to quantitative investigations. This article presents the concept of rigor in qualitative research using a phenomenological study as an exemplar to further illustrate the process. Elaborating on epistemological and theoretical conceptualizations by Lincoln and Guba, strategies congruent with qualitative perspective for ensuring validity to establish the credibility of the study are described. A synthesis of the historical development of validity criteria evident in the literature during the years is explored. Recommendations are made for use of the term rigor instead of trustworthiness and the reconceptualization and renewed use of the concept of reliability and validity in qualitative research, that strategies for ensuring rigor must be built into the qualitative research process rather than evaluated only after the inquiry, and that qualitative researchers and students alike must be proactive and take responsibility in ensuring the rigor of a research study. The insights garnered here will move novice researchers and doctoral students to a better conceptual grasp of the complexity of reliability and validity and its ramifications for qualitative inquiry.

Qualitative research has an important place within evidence-based health care (EBHC), contributing to policy on patient safety and quality of care, supporting understanding of the impact of chronic illness, and...

Chapter 1: World Views, Paradigms, and the Practice of Social Science Research Case 1. Quantitative Research Case 2. Qualitative Research Thinking about the Foundations and Practice of Research What This Book Is and Is Not About. What Warrants Our Attention? The Traditional Canon Alternative Paradigms New Techniques or New Paradigms? Chapter 2: History and Context of Paradigm Development Positivism: A Response to Metaphysical and Magical Explanations Critical Theory: A Response to Inequities in Society Interpretivism: A Response to the Excesses of Scientific Social Science The Special Cases of Postmodernism and Feminism Chapter 3: Foundational Issues: Postpositivist and Critical Perspectives Social Science Research: The View from the Postpositivist Paradigm Social Science Research: The View from the Critical Theory Paradigm Chapter 4: History and Foundations of Interpretivist Research (1) Nature of Reality. (2) Purpose of Research. (3) Acceptable Methodology/Data. (4) The Meaning of Data (5) Relationship of Research to Practice. The Implications of an Interpretivist Approach What Sorts of Research are Worthwhile? Examples of Interpretive Research Chapter 5: Frameworks for Qualitative Research Postpositivist Research Moments of Qualitative Research Some General Frameworks for Qualitative Research Chapter 6: General Guidelines for Qualitative Research Guidelines for Qualitative Research Situated or Contextual Understanding, Not Truth, is the Purpose of Research Accept Multiple Sources of Influence Take A Foundational Rather Than Technique Perspective Practice Recursive (Iterative ) and Emergent Data Collection and Analysis Use Multiple Sources of Data Think of Research as a Reflective Process The Researcher is the Primary Tool for Data Collection and Analysis An Emphasis on Participatory versus Nonparticipatory Research. Adopt an Open Approach Deal With Bias Directly Select Natural Contexts for Research Research Should be Holistic, Not Atomistic Research Involves More Than Induction and Deduction: Analogical Reasoning, Abduction, and Family Resemblances Alternatives to Postpositivist Criteria for Believability: Validity and Reliability Alternative Approaches to Validity and Reliability: Triangulation and More Conclusions? Aren't They Generalizations? Chapter 7: Methods of Qualitative Research Case 1: Action Research on a Pediatric Surgical Ward Established Qualitative Research Methods Ethnography Case Studies: Another Form of Qualitative Observation Interview Research Historigraphy Historiography: The Research Methods of History Innovative Methods Participatory Qualitative Research Emancipatory Research Critical Emancipatory Action Research Chapter 8: Approaches to Data Analysis and Intepretation The Purpose of Research General Theory Objective Description Hermeneutic (Verstehen) Understanding Story telling/Narrative Data Analysis Families Eyeballing the Data Connoisseurship: A Global Perspective Hermeneutics as a Data Analysis Method Grounded Theory Analytic Induction A Final Topic: The Ethics of Research Chapter 9: 21st Century Social Science: Peering into the Future Will the Cacophony Continue? Why Can't Social Science Converge on The Answer? Competition Linearity Dialog as an Alternative to Competition Three Approaches to Knowing in Greek Thought Plato Aristotle The Humanities Choices 20th Century Social Science Made Suppose We Chose Badly Two Theories That May Help Us Build 21st Century Social Science Poetic Logic Chaos and Complexity Theory: Another Route to a Nonlinea Social Science

The Coming of Age for Qualitative Research: Embracing the Diversity of Qualitative Methods

Who is sensitising whom? A participatory interview guide development as an awareness tool within a health care research project

The global medical and nursing research community has increasingly embraced qualitative research approaches, recognizing the additional benefits they provide to the investigation process. Qualitative research explores the intricate details of human behavior, attitudes, and experiences, emphasizing the exploration of nuances and context. Ensuring trustworthiness is crucial in establishing the credibility and reliability of qualitative findings. This includes elements such as credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. Several papers have discussed concerns regarding the rigor of qualitative health services research and have provided guidelines and checklists for publishing and conducting qualitative research. The key criteria for ensuring the quality of qualitative research include credibility, achieved through extended involvement, persistent observation, and triangulation; transferability, achieved through comprehensive and detailed explanations; dependability, achieved through rigorous documentation and the creation of an audit trail; and confirmability, achieved through peer debriefing, member checking, and reflexive journaling. Establishing reliability in qualitative research is crucial for influencing future research paths and advancing cumulative knowledge. Trustworthy qualitative research findings are also important for informing policy decisions and improving the provision of services in various fields. While qualitative research has limitations, such as subjectivity and resource constraints, the methodical application of measures to ensure trustworthiness greatly enhances the precision and reliability of qualitative research. These measures also encourage transparency and critical evaluation by the scholarly community.

Although some of the literature on teaching qualitative research methods courses has included students' experiences during courses, these experiences have not been made a primary focus of study and examined systematically. To gain a fuller understanding of students' experiences during a graduate-level qualitative methods course, 13 reflective journals were analyzed. Eight major categories emerged from the analysis: (a) struggling with a new paradigm, (b) changes in perspective on quantitative research, (c) struggling with phenomenological and other qualitative concepts and practices, (d) becoming more aware of one's role in the research process, (e) challenges faced during the research process, (f) gaining new insights into the research process, (g) gaining new insights into phenomenology and the qualitative paradigm, and (h) valuing phenomenological and other forms of qualitative research. Implications of the findings for designing and teaching qualitative methods courses are also discussed.

This study explores foundations of qualitative social work research. A template-based review was completed on 100 articles from social work journals. Reviewers examined five things: (1) purpose or aims of research, (2) rationale or justification for work, (3) populations studied, (4) presence of four markers (addressing theory, paradigm, reflexivity, and power dynamics), and (5) implications presented. Results underscore exploratory nature of qualitative social work research; authors were most likely to use word explore and least likely to use term to describe their aims. The most common rationale given for research was a gap in literature (77%), followed by severity or extent of problem (50%). Authors emphasized perspectives of respondents, who were most likely to be social work practitioners (39%) or clients (28%). Among markers examined, authors were most likely to mention use of theory (55%) and a research paradigm (51%) and least likely to apply reflexivity (16%) or acknowledge power dynamics inherent in research (7%). Finally, authors were most likely to identify practice implications in their work (90%), followed by research (60%), theory (38%), and policy (29%). KEY WORDS: epistemology; qualitative methods; research methods; social work research; theory Social inquiry is shaped by epistemology of researcher, his or her underlying assumptions about process of knowing (Denzin, 2002). Epistemology may be seen as theories of knowledge that justify knowledge-building process that is actively or consciously adopted by (Carter & Little, 2007; Pascale, 2010). These assumptions guide our decisions about topics, research questions, theories, methods, analyses, and conclusions and help us evaluate knowledge contributions of published work (Carter & Little, 2007; Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2011; Pascale, 2010). Koch and Hamngton (1998) recognized that bring to research product, data generated, a range of literature, a positioning of this literature, a positioning of oneself, and moral socio-political contexts (p. 882). Examining ways our social locations shape our process of knowing can help us understand why certain questions get asked and answered, examine how values shape observation (Pascale, 2010; Takacs, 2003, p. 37). Anastas (2004) noted that researcher's epistemology affects kind of scholarly work done, how one values scholarship and understands its political import, and how one situates oneself in relation to work. Marshall and Rossman (2006) noted importance of epistemological integrity, in which authors account for logical and compelling connections between genre, overall strategy, research questions, design, and (p. 55). Researchers demonstrate their engagement with work through explicit discussion of their research paradigm or inquiry tradition, which is fundamental for rigorous qualitative research (Anastas, 2004; Marshall & Rossman, 2006). Qualitative research should reveal a consistency and integrity of approach that is easily recognized by reader and reviewer (Padgett, 2009, p. 102). Given importance of epistemology to research endeavor, social work researchers must make explicit decisions made in process of inquiry if they are serious about contributing to knowledge base of profession. As Padgett pointed out, the burden of proof is on researcher (p. 102) to be accountable to readers regarding underlying assumptions and logic of our work. We focus our discussion on epistemology as research praxis that contributes to development of knowledge in our field. Our aim in this section of article is to discuss practice of epistemology to support social work researchers using qualitative methods to think and write more explicitly about foundations of our work. …

Thoughts on the Conduct and Dissemination of Qualitative Research