Understanding and Evaluating Qualitative Research∗
By E. Fossey, C. Harvey, F. McDermott, L. Davidson. Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry (Print), 2002
2,514 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: General Health Professions, Management Science and Operations Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7862b3d449995b9784a22bc323e5fb766f3ac286
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In General Health Professions
In Management Science and Operations Research
Citations in the corpus
- Validity in Qualitative Research (2001, background): “Integrity and criticality are represented through recursive and repetitive checks of interpretations (Ambert et al., 1995) as well as a humble presentation of findings (Thorne, 1997).”
- Managers in the firing line: Contributing factors to workplace bullying by staff – an interview study (2007, background): “The purpose of the current study was to develop an understanding of the contributing factors towards upwards bullying from the experiences of those interviewed (Fossey et al. 2002).”
- Appraising the trustworthiness of qualitative studies : Guidelines for occupational therapists. (2007, methodology): “This type of participatory research is relatively unusual, but of growing interest for occupational therapists interested in involving people of traditionally unequal power and status in research (Fossey et al., 2002).”
- How Many Interviews Are Enough? (2006, background): “…after article recommended that purposive sample sizes be determined by this milestone (e.g., Morse 1995; Sandelowski 1995; Bluff 1997; Byrne 2001; Fossey et al. 2002), and a good number of journals in the Financial support for this research was provided by the U.S. Agency for International…”
- Feedback from research participants: are member checks useful in qualitative research? (2017, background): “An often-stated purpose for using member checks is the correction of bias or misinterpretations made by researchers and ensuring accuracy and authenticity in representing participants’ experiences (Fossey et al. 2002; Kornbluh 2015).”
- A Pragmatic, Step-by-Step Guide for Qualitative Methods: Capturing the Disaster and Long-Term Recovery Stories of Katrina and Rita (2015, background): “The reasons underlying the pronounced challenges of publishing and/or funding qualitative research are many 1 For example, a dated but systematic study of one leading journal indicated that less than 2% of all published articles over a five-year span were qualitative (Ambert et al. 1995).”
- How Many Focus Groups Are Enough? Building an Evidence Base for Nonprobability Sample Sizes (2017, background): “Many published works cite ‘‘theoretical saturation’’ as the primary method for determining nonprobability sample sizes in qualitative research (e.g., 4 Field Methods 29(1) Bluff 1997; Byrne 2001; Fossey et al. 2002; Guest et al. 2006; Morse 1995; Sandelowski 1995).”
- The Development of Constructivist Grounded Theory (2006, background): “It is a delicate balancing act, enabling participants‟ accounts to retain a degree of visibility in the text so that the reader can make the connections between analytical findings and the data from which they were derived (Fossey, Harvey, McDermott, & Davidson, 2002; Jones, 2002).”