IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v46y2012i6p1727-1751.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Alternative quality standards in qualitative research?

Author

Listed:
  • C. Poortman
  • K. Schildkamp

    ()

Abstract

Qualitative researchers often use other principles for judging the quality of their study than quantitative researchers. This inhibits a straightforward assessment of the quality and comparability of different types of studies, as well as decision-making about their usefulness for further research and practice. In this article, we question the use of alternative criteria, and argue for one coherent and inclusive framework of quality criteria for both qualitative and quantitative studies. We developed such a framework, based on a comparison and operationalization of different criteria, and the elaboration of procedures to realize them. Its usability is demonstrated by the application in a qualitative case study research and a mixed-methods study. This framework enhances advancing and judging the basic quality of any type of scientific research, promoting the assessment of the quality and hence usability of studies for further research or decision-making about practice. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Suggested Citation

  • C. Poortman & K. Schildkamp, 2012. "Alternative quality standards in qualitative research?," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 1727-1751, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:46:y:2012:i:6:p:1727-1751
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-011-9555-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11135-011-9555-5
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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. Peter Swanborn, 1996. "A common base for quality control criteria in quantitative and qualitative research," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 19-35, February.
    2. Paulien Meijer & Nico Verloop & Douwe Beijaard, 2002. "Multi-Method Triangulation in a Qualitative Study on Teachers' Practical Knowledge: An Attempt to Increase Internal Validity," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 145-167, May.
    3. Anthony Onwuegbuzie & Nancy Leech, 2007. "Validity and Qualitative Research: An Oxymoron?," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 233-249, April.
    4. Joanna Sale & Lynne Lohfeld & Kevin Brazil, 2002. "Revisiting the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate: Implications for Mixed-Methods Research," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 43-53, February.
    5. Anthony Onwuegbuzie & Nancy Leech, 2005. "Taking the “Q” Out of Research: Teaching Research Methodology Courses Without the Divide Between Quantitative and Qualitative Paradigms," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 267-295, June.
    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. repec:taf:oabmxx:v:2:y:2015:i:1:p:1037225 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Triss Ashton & Nicholas Evangelopoulos & Victor Prybutok, 2014. "Extending monitoring methods to textual data: a research agenda," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 2277-2294, July.
    3. Marianne Döös & Lena Wilhelmson, 2014. "Proximity and distance: phases of intersubjective qualitative data analysis in a research team," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 1089-1106, March.

    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:46:y:2012:i:6:p:1727-1751. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.