IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v48y2014i1p387-408.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Beyond the existence proof: ontological conditions, epistemological implications, and in-depth interview research

Author

Listed:
  • Samuel Lucas

Abstract

In-depth interviewing is a promising method. Alas, traditional in-depth interview sample designs prohibit generalizing. Yet, after acknowledging this limitation, in-depth interview studies generalize anyway. Generalization appears unavoidable; thus, sample design must be grounded in plausible ontological and epistemological assumptions that enable generalization. Many in-depth interviewers reject such designs. The paper demonstrates that traditional sampling for in-depth interview studies is indefensible given plausible ontological conditions, and engages the epistemological claims that purportedly justify traditional sampling. The paper finds that the promise of in-depth interviewing will go unrealized unless interviewers adopt ontologically plausible sample designs. Otherwise, in-depth interviewing can only provide existence proofs, at best. Copyright The Author(s) 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Samuel Lucas, 2014. "Beyond the existence proof: ontological conditions, epistemological implications, and in-depth interview research," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 387-408, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:48:y:2014:i:1:p:387-408
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-012-9775-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11135-012-9775-3
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-012-9775-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Katie Wright & James Copestake, 2004. "Impact assessment of microfinance using qualitative data: communicating between social scientists and practitioners using the QUIP," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(3), pages 355-367.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. de Boer, Alie & Geboers, Lisanne & van de Koppel, Sonja & van Hunsel, Florence, 2022. "Governance of nutrivigilance in the Netherlands: Reporting adverse events of non-registered products," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(8), pages 731-737.
    2. Azemi, Yllka & Ozuem, Wilson & Wiid, Ria & Hobson, Ana, 2022. "Luxury fashion brand customers’ perceptions of mobile marketing: Evidence of multiple communications and marketing channels," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    3. Sadika Sharmin & Noor Aman Hamid & Wan Abdul Manan Bin Wan Muda, 2021. "Dietary Intake Patterns and Nutritional Status of Food Secure and Insecure Women Garment Factory Workers in Bangladesh," Journal of Food Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(3), pages 1-1, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Widiarto, Indra & Emrouznejad, Ali, 2015. "Social and financial efficiency of Islamic microfinance institutions: A Data Envelopment Analysis application," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 1-17.
    2. Joana Silva Afonso, 2020. "Impact evaluation, social performance assessment and standardisation: reflections from microfinance evaluations in Pakistan and Zimbabwe," Working Papers in Economics & Finance 2020-14, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth Business School, Economics and Finance Subject Group.
    3. Patricia J. Rogers & Michael Woolcock, 2023. "Process and Implementation Evaluations: A Primer," CID Working Papers 433, Center for International Development at Harvard University.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:48:y:2014:i:1:p:387-408. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.