R8360 Guidelines for Reading and EvaluatingQualitative
\nResearch Articles
\n1. Find the research question. It\u2019s typically located at the end of the literature
\nreview, right before the Methods section. NOTE \u2013 it may not be written as
\na question, but the intended question is often found within the declared
\npurpose or objective, if the author has not explicitly stated it in question
\nform.
\na. Describe the phenomenon of interest. Evaluate how consistent it is
\nwith what is typically explored in a qualitative study.
\nb. Consider the target group(s)\/individual(s)\/organizations identified
\nin the question. How clearly does the author convey the group of
\ninterest in a way that is consistent with qualitative research?
\nc. Review how the question is phrased. Is appropriate qualitative
\nterminology used? How well does this question indicate to the
\nreader as to what type of approach is being used?
\n2. Check the article title.
\na. How consistent is the terminology and intent of the title with the
\nresearch question?
\n3. Identify the research problem that emerges from the literature review\/
\nbackground.
\na. How does the author(s) justify a social problem?
\nb. How thorough is the discussion of research that has been done,
\nand note if the phenomenon or choice of group is not clearly and
\nsufficiently justified (e.g., just one or two studies; articles from
\nobscure journals, non-academic sources; or literature that is more
\nthan five years older than the study\u2019s published date).
\nc. How appropriate is the research problem to a qualitative inquiry?
\n4. Identify the research purpose.
\na. To what extent is the purpose aligned with the research problem
\n(terminology, group of interest, phenomenon of interest)?
\n5. Identify the approach.
\na. Where in the article is the qualitative approach identified?
\nb. How well is the approach explained and justified?
\n6. Consider the description of the sample.
\na. How well was the inclusion\/exclusion criteria described? How was
\nthe number of cases justified (Mason, 2010)?
\nb. Was a particular sampling strategy identified? Was it correctly
\nimplemented? If not, how well were the discrepancies described?
\nc. How well does the sampling strategy fit the approach?
\nd. Did the authors include a description of their efforts to achieve
\ndata saturation (see Guest, Bunce, & Johnson, 2006; Mason,
\n2010)? Theoretical saturation, if appropriate? What was their
\nstrategy and how well was it achieved? To what extent does their
\neffort threaten or support the credibility of the study?
\n7. Consider the recruitment, invitation, and informed consent process.
\na. Were these elements explained well enough that you could judge
\nthis a credible and rigorous process (Guest, 2004)?
\nb. To what extent was the informed consent process sufficiently
\ndetailed? And, was this sufficient to protect participants from harm
\nand insure confidentiality?
\n8. Review the data collection tools and procedures.
\na. Are the actual data collection tools included in the article? If so, to
\nwhat extent are the questions
\ni. Open-ended?
\nii. Not leading?
\niii. Using appropriate, non-technical language?
\n2
\niv. Consistent with the purpose and approach?
\nv. Insightful or open-ended so that participants might reveal
\nsurprising or unexpected experiences?
\nb. To what extent are the data collection tools consistent (content
\nand procedures) with the identified approach?
\nc. To what extent are the data collection procedures consistent with
\nthe identified approach?
\nd. How well are the details, consistencies, and inconsistencies of the
\nprocedures explained? Was the detail sufficient that you could
\njudge the procedures as dependable and rigorous?
\ne. To what extent did the authors include discussions of reflexivity in
\nthe data analysis process (Mauthner & Doucet, 2003)?
\n9. Consider the data analysis process.
\na. Was the data analysis process explained in sufficient detail that
\nyou as the reader could follow?
\nb. To what extent did the authors follow a published or well-source
\nmethod of analysis? What was it and was their choice consistent
\nwith the approach?
\nc. To what extent did the authors include discussions of reflexivity in
\nthe data analysis process?
\n10. Read the details of the analysis.
\na. How did the authors summarize the participants in the study? Was
\nthere sufficient detail provided to verify that the sampling strategy
\nhad been successfully implemented?
\nb. How were the themes or key concepts identified? Was a published
\nstrategy followed? Was that strategy consistent with the approach
\nof the study?
\nc. How were the results presented? How well did the themes
\nrepresent the underlying categories or concepts? Were the figures
\nor tables (if included) helpful in understanding the results?
\nd. Did the authors note any unexpected findings or discrepant cases?
\nIf yes, what was surprising, if no, does this suggest a potential
\nbias?
\n11. Review the discussion and how results compared with prior research.
\na. Was a summary of the results clearly presented in the beginning of
\nthis section?
\nb. To what extent were each of the key results interpreted and
\ncontrasted with prior literature? How did the authors handle results
\nthat challenged or diverged from prior studies?
\nc. To what extent did the study results and conclusions answer the
\nresearch question?
\nd. How credible was the discussion of limitations?
\ne. Do the study limitations weaken the transferability of the study?
\nf. To what extent would the suggestions for future studies be helpful
\nfor persons who want to do more research in this area? Are they
\ntoo broad? Unfocused?
\n12. Evaluate the conclusion.
\na. Did the authors convey a clear \u201ctake-home\u201d message?
\nb. To what extent were the conclusions appropriate given the study
\napproach, scope, purpose, and limitations?
\n3
\nReferences
\nGuest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough?
\nAn experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59\u201382.
\nMason, M. (2010). Sample size and saturation in PhD studies using qualitative
\ninterviews. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung \/ Forum: Qualitative Social
\nResearch, 11(3). Retrieved from http:\/\/nbnresolving.
\nde\/urn:nbn:de:0114fqs100387
\nMauthner, N. S., & Doucet, A., 2003. Reflexive accounts and accounts of
\nreflexivity in qualitative data analysis. Sociology, 37, 413\u2013431.
\nShenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative
\nresearch project ( help with nursing paper writing from experts with MSN & DNP degrees)s. Education for Information, 22(2), 63\u201375.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
R8360 Guidelines for Reading and EvaluatingQualitative Research Articles 1. Find the research question. It\u2019s typically located at the end of the literature review, right before\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8816],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-115363","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-thesis-writing-help-online"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/115363","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=115363"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/115363\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=115363"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=115363"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.studyproessays.com\/help\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=115363"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}