Recommendations for Designing and Reviewing Qualitative Research in Psychology: Promoting Methodological Integrity

By H. Levitt, Sue L. Motulsky, Fredrick J. Wertz, Susan L. Morrow, J. Ponterotto. 2017

733 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, General Health Professions, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b7242ef51bb27489b772041cac48244069003f3c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

1. Victoria Clarke
2. Virginia Braun
3. Seçil Akyıldız
4. Julie Barnett
5. S. Thorpe
6. Konstantina Vasileiou
7. Brett W. Smith
8. Kerry R. McGannon

In General Health Professions

1. Victoria Clarke
2. Virginia Braun
3. Brett W. Smith
4. Kerry R. McGannon
5. Jason Arday
6. Favourate Sebele Mpofu

In Social Psychology

1. Brett W. Smith
2. Julie Barnett
3. Victoria Clarke
4. S. Thorpe
5. Konstantina Vasileiou
6. Virginia Braun
7. Kerry R. McGannon
8. Terry Young

Citations in the corpus

• An Overview of Qualitative Research and Focus Group Discussion (2021, background): “Qualitative research is related to nature, and the researcher typically investigates the interpretations and perspectives of a particular environment (Corbin & Strauss, 2014; Levitt et al., 2017).”
• One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? (2020, unknown): “Finally, we recommend that journal editors provide longer page limits for TA – and other qualitative – papers (Levitt et al. 2018, 2017).”
• Characterising and justifying sample size sufficiency in interview-based studies: systematic analysis of qualitative health research over a 15-year period (2018, background): “This lack of transparency about sample size sufficiency is problematic given that most qualitative researchers would agree that it is an important marker of quality [56, 57].”
• Supporting best practice in reflexive thematic analysis reporting in Palliative Medicine: A review of published research and introduction to the Reflexive Thematic Analysis Reporting Guidelines (RTARG) (2024, methodology): “24 The RTARG is intended to facilitate reporting that is methodologically coherent with the Big Q/artfully inter-pretive values of reflexive thematic analysis.”
• Developing rigor in qualitative research: problems and opportunities within sport and exercise psychology (2017, background): “…have led researchers to conclude that it is a myth (Morse, 1997), a misconception (Cook, 2012), inappropriate for interpretive qualitative research (Levitt et al., 2016; Madill et al., 2000), not worth pursing (Braun & Clarke, 2013), and a flimsily retrofitted procedure in qualitative clothes to…”