Ensuring quality in qualitative inquiry: Using key concepts as guidelines
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2013 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1980-65742013000300007 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/111502 |
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 |
UNSP_2d990d47f76405415c00e103facd07df |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/111502 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Ensuring quality in qualitative inquiry: Using key concepts as guidelinesGarantindo qualidade na investigação qualitativa: Usando conceitos-chave como diretrizesGarantizar la calidad en la investigación cualitativa: Utilizando conceptos clave como directricesqualitative 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.“Garantindo qualidade na investigação qualitativa: Usando conceitos-chave como diretrizes.” O campo da investigação científica qualitativa emprega uma variedade de abordagens em rápido crescimento, cujas tradições, procedimentos e estruturas variam, dependendo do tipo de projeto e metodologia de estudo (i.e., fenomenológica, etnográfica, teoria fundamentada, estudo de caso, pesquisa-ação, etc .). Com a abordagem interpretativa, os pesquisadores não utilizam as mesmas medidas de validade utilizadas nas abordagens positivistas para a investigação científica, uma vez que é “... não algo padrão ou estrutura aceita como tipicamente se encontra em pesquisa quantitativa” (Creswell, 2007). Com a ausência de um padrão único, como, então, é possível para os pesquisadores qualitativos saber se seu estudo foi ou não feito com rigor, que tem validade, que está pronto para ser apresentado aos seus pares? A literatura de pesquisa é cheia de referências sobre qualidade em investigação qualitativa, o que ajuda a interpretar a validade do estudo. Markula (2008) sugere que devemos validar os resultados do nosso estudo assegurando aos leitores que foi feito “da melhor maneira possível.” Embora cada tradição de pesquisa tenha seu próprio conjunto de critérios para avaliar a qualidade, apresentaremos aqui os conceitos gerais resgatados da literatura. Esperamos que este artigo proporcione uma base na qual os pesquisadores qualitativos possam julgar o seu trabalho antes de divulgá-lo a seus pares¸ uma base que possa ajudar a garantir que seu estudo foi feito “da melhor maneira possível.”Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)Sao Paulo State Univ Rio Claro, BR-13506900 Rio Claro, SP, BrazilSao Paulo State Univ Rio Claro, BR-13506900 Rio Claro, SP, BrazilUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp), Instituto de BiociênciasUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Campbell, Debra Frances [UNESP]Machado, Afonso Antonio [UNESP]2014-12-03T13:08:42Z2014-12-03T13:08:42Z2013-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article572-579application/pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1980-65742013000300007Motriz: revista de Educacao Física. Rio Claro: Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Inst Biociencias, v. 19, n. 3, p. 572-579, 2013.1980-6574http://hdl.handle.net/11449/111502S1980-65742013000300007WOS:000330506500008S1980-65742013000300007.pdf99988246475361090000-0002-5669-5425Web of Sciencereponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengMotriz: Revista de Educação Física2294920,254info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2023-11-19T06:12:15Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/111502Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-08-05T18:08:27.453172Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Ensuring quality in qualitative inquiry: Using key concepts as guidelines Garantindo qualidade na investigação qualitativa: Usando conceitos-chave como diretrizes Garantizar la calidad en la investigación cualitativa: Utilizando conceptos clave como directrices |
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 [UNESP] 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 [UNESP] |
author_facet |
Campbell, Debra Frances [UNESP] Machado, Afonso Antonio [UNESP] |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Machado, Afonso Antonio [UNESP] |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Campbell, Debra Frances [UNESP] Machado, Afonso Antonio [UNESP] |
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 |
2013-01-01 2014-12-03T13:08:42Z 2014-12-03T13:08:42Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1980-65742013000300007 Motriz: revista de Educacao Física. Rio Claro: Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Inst Biociencias, v. 19, n. 3, p. 572-579, 2013. 1980-6574 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/111502 S1980-65742013000300007 WOS:000330506500008 S1980-65742013000300007.pdf 9998824647536109 0000-0002-5669-5425 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1980-65742013000300007 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/111502 |
identifier_str_mv |
Motriz: revista de Educacao Física. Rio Claro: Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Inst Biociencias, v. 19, n. 3, p. 572-579, 2013. 1980-6574 S1980-65742013000300007 WOS:000330506500008 S1980-65742013000300007.pdf 9998824647536109 0000-0002-5669-5425 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Motriz: Revista de Educação Física 229492 0,254 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
572-579 application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp), Instituto de Biociências |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp), Instituto de Biociências |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Web of Science reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) instacron:UNESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
instacron_str |
UNESP |
institution |
UNESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1808128900741464064 |