Methodolatry and Qualitative Health Research

Author:

Chamberlain Kerry1

Affiliation:

1. Massey University, New Zealand

Abstract

The increasing turn to qualitative research in health psychology raises a number of issues about the appropriate use and relevance of qualitative methods in this field. In this article I raise concerns about methodolatry: the privileging of methodological concerns over other considerations in qualitative health research. I argue that qualitative researchers are in danger of reifying methods in the same way as their colleagues in quantitative research have done for some time. Reasons for the pre-eminence of methods are discussed briefly and their consequences considered. The latter include: a concern with ‘proper’ or ‘correct’ methods; a focus on description at the expense of interpretation; a concern with issues of validity and generalizability; an avoidance of theory; an avoidance of the critical; and the stance of the researcher. I offer some suggestions for avoiding methodolatry and some opinions on how we might develop and use qualitative research more effectively in health psychology.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Applied Psychology

Cited by 147 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

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