‘Clear as Mud’: Toward Greater Clarity in Generic Qualitative Research
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 1 June 2003
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in International Journal of Qualitative Methods
- Vol. 2 (2), 1-13
- https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690300200201
Abstract
We have observed a growth in the number of qualitative studies that have no guiding set of philosophic assumptions in the form of one of the established qualitative methodologies. This lack of allegiance to an established qualitative approach presents many challenges for “generic qualitative” studies, one of which is that the literature lacks debate about how to do a generic study well. We encourage such debate and offer four basic requirements as a point of departure: noting the researchers' position, distinguishing method and methodology, making explicit the approach to rigor, and identifying the researchers' analytic lens.Keywords
This publication has 38 references indexed in Scilit:
- Myth 94: Qualitative Health Researchers will Agree about ValidityQualitative Health Research, 2001
- Whatever happened to qualitative description?Research in Nursing & Health, 2000
- Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Sampling, Data Collection, and Analysis Techniques in Mixed-Method StudiesResearch in Nursing & Health, 2000
- Phenomenological Positivism and other Problematic Trends in Health Science ResearchQualitative Health Research, 1997
- (Re)writing ethnography: the unsettling questions for nursing research raised by post‐structural approaches to ‘the field’Nursing Inquiry, 1996
- Reflexivity in Fieldwork: Toward a Ferninist EpistemologyImage: the Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 1991
- Methodological Orthodoxy in Qualitative Nursing Research: Analysis of the IssuesQualitative Health Research, 1991
- IntroductionJournal of Children in Contemporary Society, 1990
- IntroductionPublished by ASTM International ,1987
- Issues of validity in openly ideological research: Between a rock and a soft placeInterchange, 1986