IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Alternative quality standards in qualitative research?

  • C. Poortman
  • K. Schildkamp

    ()

Registered author(s):

    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

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    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 look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Springer in its journal Quality & Quantity.

    Volume (Year): 46 (2012)
    Issue (Month): 6 (October)
    Pages: 1727-1751

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:46:y:2012:i:6:p:1727-1751
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11135

    Order Information: Web: http://link.springer.de/orders.htm

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    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, 06.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    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: (Guenther Eichhorn)

    or (Christopher F Baum)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.