Dorothy Horsburgh
Evaluation of qualitative research.
Horsburgh, Dorothy
Authors
Abstract
Summary
• It is necessary to subject published research to critical scrutiny, in order to evaluate the robustness of the findings.
• The criteria used in evaluation require to be appropriate for the research paradigm, i.e. quantitative or qualitative. Quantitative conceptualizations of reliability and validity are unsuitable for evaluation of qualitative research as they were not devised for this purpose.
• The use of quantitative criteria to evaluate qualitative research may create the impression that the latter is not academically rigorous.
• Evaluation criteria which are specific to qualitative research require identification and application, in order to provide a formalized and rigorous approach to critical appraisal.
• A formalized framework for evaluation will help to ensure that the contribution of qualitative studies, with specific reference to health services research, receives optimum recognition.
• The work of a number of writers is used in this paper to examine the features which distinguish qualitative research and the following are discussed:
• the need for researcher reflexivity;
• the use of the ‘first person’ in academic work;
• the context in which research takes place;
• the selection of research participants;
• the interpretation of participants' accounts;
• the active acknowledgement of ‘lay’ knowledge;
• researcher flexibility within the research process;
• the generalizability of findings.
• It is concluded that academically rigorous criteria, which are appropriate for evaluation of qualitative research, exist and are available for use by practitioners and researchers.
Citation
Horsburgh, D. (2003). Evaluation of qualitative research. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 12, 307-312. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2702.2003.00683.x
Journal Article Type | Article |
---|---|
Publication Date | 2003 |
Deposit Date | May 1, 2013 |
Print ISSN | 0962-1067 |
Electronic ISSN | 1365-2702 |
Publisher | Wiley |
Peer Reviewed | Peer Reviewed |
Volume | 12 |
Pages | 307-312 |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2702.2003.00683.x |
Keywords | criteria for evaluation; critical appraisal; qualitative research; |
Public URL | http://researchrepository.napier.ac.uk/id/eprint/6032 |
Publisher URL | http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2702.2003.00683.x |
You might also like
Review: How, and when, can i restrain a patient?
(2004)
Journal Article
The ethical implications and legal aspects of patient restraint.
(2003)
Journal Article
The NMC code of conduct and applied ethical principles.
(2007)
Book Chapter
Downloadable Citations
About Edinburgh Napier Research Repository
Administrator e-mail: repository@napier.ac.uk
This application uses the following open-source libraries:
SheetJS Community Edition
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
PDF.js
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
Font Awesome
SIL OFL 1.1 (http://scripts.sil.org/OFL)
MIT License (http://opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.html)
CC BY 3.0 ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
Powered by Worktribe © 2024
Advanced Search