Ensuring quality in qualitative inquiry: using key concepts as guidelines

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Campbell,Debra Frances
Data de Publicação: 2013
Outros Autores: Machado,Afonso A.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Motriz (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1980-65742013000300007
Resumo: The field of qualitative scientific inquiry employs a fast-growing variety of approaches, whose traditions, procedures, and structures vary, depending on the type of study design and methodology (i.e., phenomenological, ethnographic, grounded theory, case study, action research, etc.). With the interpretive approach, researchers do not utilize the same measures of validity used in positivist approaches to scientific inquiry, since there is "...no one standard or accepted structure as one typically finds in quantitative research" (Creswell, 2007). With the absence of a single standard, how, then, is it possible for qualitative researchers to know whether or not their study was done with rigor, that it has validity, that it is ready to submit to their peers? The research literature is sprinkled with references to quality in qualitative inquiry, which helps to construe a study's validity. Markula (2008) suggests that we validate our study's findings by assuring readers that it was done "in the best possible way." While each research tradition has its own set of criteria for judging quality, we present here general concepts drawn from the literature. We hope this article will provide a framework from which qualitative researchers can judge their work before submitting it to their peers¸ one which will help ensure that their study was done "in the best possible way."
id UNESP-17_dffc9d73129a2c42bd1de69fe96f2c23
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1980-65742013000300007
network_acronym_str UNESP-17
network_name_str Motriz (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Ensuring quality in qualitative inquiry: using key concepts as guidelinesqualitative researchqualitative methodologyvalidityThe field of qualitative scientific inquiry employs a fast-growing variety of approaches, whose traditions, procedures, and structures vary, depending on the type of study design and methodology (i.e., phenomenological, ethnographic, grounded theory, case study, action research, etc.). With the interpretive approach, researchers do not utilize the same measures of validity used in positivist approaches to scientific inquiry, since there is "...no one standard or accepted structure as one typically finds in quantitative research" (Creswell, 2007). With the absence of a single standard, how, then, is it possible for qualitative researchers to know whether or not their study was done with rigor, that it has validity, that it is ready to submit to their peers? The research literature is sprinkled with references to quality in qualitative inquiry, which helps to construe a study's validity. Markula (2008) suggests that we validate our study's findings by assuring readers that it was done "in the best possible way." While each research tradition has its own set of criteria for judging quality, we present here general concepts drawn from the literature. We hope this article will provide a framework from which qualitative researchers can judge their work before submitting it to their peers¸ one which will help ensure that their study was done "in the best possible way."Universidade Estadual Paulista2013-09-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1980-65742013000300007Motriz: Revista de Educação Física v.19 n.3 2013reponame:Motriz (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESP10.1590/S1980-65742013000300007info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCampbell,Debra FrancesMachado,Afonso A.eng2013-10-03T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1980-65742013000300007Revistahttp://www.periodicos.rc.biblioteca.unesp.br/index.php/motrizPUBhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpmotriz@rc.unesp.br||mauerber@rc.unesp.br||azanesco@rc.unesp.br1980-65741415-9805opendoar:2022-11-08T16:30:15.348728Motriz (Online) - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)true
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Ensuring quality in qualitative inquiry: using key concepts as guidelines
title Ensuring quality in qualitative inquiry: using key concepts as guidelines
spellingShingle Ensuring quality in qualitative inquiry: using key concepts as guidelines
Campbell,Debra Frances
qualitative research
qualitative methodology
validity
title_short Ensuring quality in qualitative inquiry: using key concepts as guidelines
title_full Ensuring quality in qualitative inquiry: using key concepts as guidelines
title_fullStr Ensuring quality in qualitative inquiry: using key concepts as guidelines
title_full_unstemmed Ensuring quality in qualitative inquiry: using key concepts as guidelines
title_sort Ensuring quality in qualitative inquiry: using key concepts as guidelines
author Campbell,Debra Frances
author_facet Campbell,Debra Frances
Machado,Afonso A.
author_role author
author2 Machado,Afonso A.
author2_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Campbell,Debra Frances
Machado,Afonso A.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv qualitative research
qualitative methodology
validity
topic qualitative research
qualitative methodology
validity
description The field of qualitative scientific inquiry employs a fast-growing variety of approaches, whose traditions, procedures, and structures vary, depending on the type of study design and methodology (i.e., phenomenological, ethnographic, grounded theory, case study, action research, etc.). With the interpretive approach, researchers do not utilize the same measures of validity used in positivist approaches to scientific inquiry, since there is "...no one standard or accepted structure as one typically finds in quantitative research" (Creswell, 2007). With the absence of a single standard, how, then, is it possible for qualitative researchers to know whether or not their study was done with rigor, that it has validity, that it is ready to submit to their peers? The research literature is sprinkled with references to quality in qualitative inquiry, which helps to construe a study's validity. Markula (2008) suggests that we validate our study's findings by assuring readers that it was done "in the best possible way." While each research tradition has its own set of criteria for judging quality, we present here general concepts drawn from the literature. We hope this article will provide a framework from which qualitative researchers can judge their work before submitting it to their peers¸ one which will help ensure that their study was done "in the best possible way."
publishDate 2013
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2013-09-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1980-65742013000300007
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1980-65742013000300007
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S1980-65742013000300007
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual Paulista
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual Paulista
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Motriz: Revista de Educação Física v.19 n.3 2013
reponame:Motriz (Online)
instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron:UNESP
instname_str Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron_str UNESP
institution UNESP
reponame_str Motriz (Online)
collection Motriz (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Motriz (Online) - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv motriz@rc.unesp.br||mauerber@rc.unesp.br||azanesco@rc.unesp.br
_version_ 1788170934325084160