‘Rigour’, ‘Ethical Integrity’ or ‘Artistry’? Reflexively Reviewing Criteria for Evaluating Qualitative Research

Author:

Finlay Linda

Abstract

Qualitative researchers contest and reject the criteria used by quantitative researchers when evaluating their work: those of reliability, validity and generalisability. Instead, qualitative researchers have developed alternative criteria responsive to their specific research ideals. These criteria encompass various dimensions of ‘rigour’, ‘ethical integrity’ and ‘artistry’. This article attempts to show something of the range of evaluative criteria available to qualitative researchers, arguing that their choice of criteria needs to be compatible with the special nature of the research in question (its methodology, aims and assumptions). Occupational therapists are encouraged to be clear, thoughtful and reflexive about their position and values when evaluating their research. To this end, recent occupational therapy research is reviewed to identify the criteria that authors favour. I also proffer my own reflexive voice towards critically evaluating my approach in this article.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Occupational Therapy

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3