Review articleFrostNollaig (ed.), Qualitative Research Methods in Psychology. Maidenhead: Open University Press, 2011. v + 223 pp. ISBN 9780335241507 (hbk) £66.50; ISBN 9780335241514 (pbk) £23.75BanisterPeterBunnGeoffBurmanEricaDanielsJohnDukettPaulGoodleyDanLawthomRebeccaParkerIanRunswicke-ColeKatherineSixsmithJudithSmailesSophieTindallCarolWhelanPauline, Qualitative Methods in Psychology: A Research Guide, 2nd ed.Maidenhead: Open University Press, 2011. v + 233 pp. ISBN 9780335243051 (pbk) £26.99

2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 242-244
Author(s):  
Dawn Mannay

99 entries The Oxford Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods in Education has brought together scholars from across the globe who use qualitative methods in their research to address the history, current uses, adaptations for specific knowledge domains and situations, and problematics that drive the methodology. This is the most comprehensive resource available on qualitative methods in education. For novice researchers, the Encyclopedia enables a broad view of the methods and how to enact them in the studies that early-career researchers may wish to conduct. For the experienced researcher, the range of approaches and adaptations covered enables the development of sophisticated methodological designs. For those who are qualitative research methodologists, this book reveals where the methodology has come from and where it is going. Methodologists can use these volumes to discern where new ideas and practices are needed, and provide the bases for new methodological works. For those who teach these methods, the Encyclopedia is an invaluable compendium that can be tapped for inclusion in courses and to enable the instructor to be able to quickly respond to specific student needs with high-quality methodological resources.


2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (5) ◽  
pp. 779-788 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robyn Dowling ◽  
Kate Lloyd ◽  
Sandie Suchet-Pearson

In this, our third and final snapshot of contemporary qualitative research methods, we pick up on the proliferation of non-representational theory across human geography and focus on research methods concerned with practices that exceed (more than) representation or are non-representational. We chart work that pays attention to the non-visible, the non-verbal and the non-obvious, as well as methods and methodologies that enable researchers to grasp and grapple with assemblages, relationalities, and life as it unfolds. We characterize these ‘more-than representational’ methodologies as: experimenting with approaches to research, using picturing as an embedded research methodology, and highlighting research as sensing. We conclude that these have opened new forms of knowledge, including into subdisciplines like health geography. Nonetheless, a privileging of written and visual modes of thinking and representing remain, and the discipline must be vigilant to nurture and value the emerging work on neural diversity and non-Western modes of thinking.


2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryan C. Taylor

<p>Two current forms of globalization are inherently interesting to academic qualitative researchers. The first is <em>the globalization of qualitative research methods </em>themselves. The second is <em>the globalization of academic disciplines </em>in which those methods are institutionalized as a valuable resource for professional practices of teaching and scholarly research. This essay argues that patterns in existing discussion of these two trends create an opportunity for innovative scholarship. That opportunity involves reflexively leveraging qualitative research methods to study the simultaneous negotiation by academic communities of <em>both </em>qualitative methods <em>and </em>their professional discipline. Five theories that serve to develop this opportunity are reviewed, focusing on their related benefits and limitations, and the specific research questions they yield. The essay concludes by synthesizing distinctive commitments of this proposed research program.</p>


2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 385-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corrado Matta

This article discusses the concept of evidential reasoning in the context of qualitative research methods in the social sciences. A conceptualization of qualitative evidential reasoning is proposed. This conceptualization is based on the analysis of an example of qualitative methods applied to the study of music education. I argue that this conceptualization identifies specific and nontrivial conditions for qualitative evidential reasoning and, at the same time, supports the claim that there is no essential methodological separation regarding evidence between quantitative and qualitative methods.


1985 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 209-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Cook Merrill

Recent occupational therapy literature has pointed to significant similarities in the principles of qualitative research methods and the underlying assumptions and values of our profession. This article presents an overview of qualitative methods, an analysis of the relationship between qualitative and quantitative approaches in social and cultural research, and a brief discussion of the issues of reliability, validity, and researcher objectivity in qualitative research. The application of qualitative methods in a research project on juvenile arthritis is used to illustrate an exploration of the importance of such methods to occupational therapy theory and practice.


2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dr. Ehsanullah Tarin

<div class="WordSection1"><p>I am honored for being an alumnus of KEMC, and am delighted to write this editorial for the Annals. I have, ever since done my research and taught qualitative methods, felt that clinical methods are quite akin to qualitative research. Then, why only few clinical researchers use qualitative methods? A witness to this assumption is the research published in the Annals. In this treatise, I try to identify some parallels between the two types of methods and argue for the clinicians to invest in learning qualitative research methods to practice clinical methods well.</p><p>      Qualitative research is to identify and interpret issues from the perspective of participants, their experience of: illness or disability, using health service, and to appreciate the meanings they give to the behaviour, events or objects in the context of their social and cultural norms. In this type of research, the emphasis is on exploring the associations and understanding the phenomenon in its holism; and not, like in quantitative research, from an outsider’s perspective and for certain specific aspects.<sup>1</sup> It requires participants with specific characteristics, selected purposely that can best inform the research topic. More participants, identified inductively during data collection, are added to develop full and multiple perspectives about the cases.<sup>2</sup></p><p>      No preset data collection tool is used, instead qualitative researcher guided by a research question acts as an instrument, since the line of enquiry he changes during data collection as new understanding is gained and/or the situation changes.<sup>3</sup> The data for research is derived from the observation, interviews or verbal interactions, focus group discussions, document reviews, life histories etc. and the researcher asks why, how and under what circumstances things occur; and not just what, where and when. It is recorded in words or pictures and log book is used to record notes arising from interviews, observations, extracts from documents etc.</p><p>      In health care settings patients are the subjects for clinical methods. The clinician, even prior to any verbal communication, observes the patient, e.g. for his gait and appearance. If in a bed or examination couch, his posture could give some clue to the illness. Inspection, a clinical method, is like systematic observation, which is qualitative method, should be holistic. In my third year during bedside teaching, Professor (late) Rashid Ahmed Qureshi said, <em>“patient has come to you as a whole and not his stomach in a tray”</em>, when a student straight went to examine abdomen of a patient with acute abdomen. History taking, another clinical method, is like conducting semi structured in depth interview – a qualitative research method. In both disciplines, we are told, <em>“not to ask leading, but follow up and probing questions”; </em>and Professor (late) Alamgir Khan, while teaching clinical methods, would add, <em>“if a good history is taken, you will establish diagnosis in over 65% of cases”. </em>Likewise, as part of history taking, documents related to patient’s illness history and treatment are reviewed  similar to document review in qualitative research.</p><p>      The two approaches however differ in how the data is analysed. In clinical practice, diagnosis is established based on the pathophysiological knowledge or patient’s clinical condition is discussed in clinicopathological conference.<sup>4</sup> On the other hand, qualitative research employs meaning based data analysis, whereby the qualitative data is transformed into some form of explanation, understanding or interpretation of people and situation that is investigated.<sup>5,6</sup></p><p>      In conclusion, the history, the observation and the review of document related to patient are since obtainned using qualitative methods, the clinician trained in these methods could not only conduct these methods well but also interpret the data to identify and detect obstacles to the change in clinical condition and the reasons why improvement does or does not occur.<sup>7</sup> Finally, while it is heartening that research forums are organised in the institutions affiliated with KEMU, in order the research is richer, the researchers’ skills in qualitative research methods should be built.</p></div>


Author(s):  
Karen A. Erickson ◽  
David A. Koppenhaver

Qualitative research methods, in many forms, have been used to deepen understandings in the field of severe disabilities for decades. Using methods such as individual case studies, grounded theory, phenomenology, content analysis, life history, and ethnography, qualitative research has served to explain bounded systems, generate theory, study the lived experiences of individuals, investigate historical and contemporary texts and contexts, share first-person narratives, and investigate cultural and social systems that involve students with severe disabilities. Indicators of quality in qualitative methods and means of establishing credibility have been explicated and are widely applied in the field. To varying degrees, qualitative methods have allowed researchers to represent the voices of students with severe disabilities and engage them actively in the research process, which is important given that a mantra among persons with severe disabilities and their advocates is nothing about us without us. Regardless of the methods, accurately representing the voices of students with severe disabilities and including them as active participants in research is not always easy to accomplish given the nature of their cognitive and communication profiles. Many students with severe disabilities do not communicate symbolically through speech, sign language, or graphic symbols. Others have limited means of communication and are dependent on familiar communication partners to co-construct meaning with them. Some approaches to qualitative research, such as post-critical ethnography, provide a potential path toward representing the voice of a broader range of students with severe disabilities because these methods lead researchers to interrogate assumptions in the field while examining their own positions, perceptions, and beliefs relative to the subject of the investigation. While these methods offer opportunity with respect to their ability to fairly represent and involve students with severe disabilities, they challenge previously accepted indicators of quality and means of establishing credibility in qualitative research. As qualitative research methods are applied in understanding students with severe disabilities in the future, these challenges will have to be addressed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 429-431
Author(s):  
Mary M. Shirley

AbstractDavid Skarbek argues that qualitative research methods can analyze institutions by exploiting complex evidence not accessible through quantitative methods. He suggests that well-done case studies and process tracing can meet some of the same tests of inference as statistical methods. Although Skarbek's critique and proposals mirror those of many other authors, including Ronald Coase, he nonetheless makes an important contribution. The brief, cogent, and instructive way he presents his advice and his defense of qualitative methods as a complement to mainstream methods rather than a confrontation, may be more persuasive than more confrontational arguments. As ‘datafication’ is quickly turning qualitative observations into quantitative data analyzed through machine learning, Skarbek's excellent advice on how to understand what is happening under different institutional settings could not be timelier.


1988 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 155-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sari Knopp Biklen ◽  
Charles R. Moseley

Qualitative research methods generally depend heavily on good communication between researcher and informant. When qualitative methodologists study informants with severe retardation whose use of language may be limited, what do they do? If the researchers plan to study the world of the informant, then traditional participant observation guidelines are useful. But when the researcher wants to interview the informant, some modifications need to be made. The authors suggest several guidelines to follow.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document