David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Phenomenological Psychology 25 (2):147-173 (1994)
Qualitative research has tended to evoke rather stereotyped objections from the mainstream of social science. Ten standardized responses to the stimulus "qualitative research interview" are discussed: it is not scientific, not objective, not trustworthy, nor reliable, not intersubjective, not a formalized method, not hypothesis testing, not quantitative, not generalizable, and not valid. With the objections to qualitative interviews highly predictable, they may be taken into account when designing, reporting, and defending an interview study. As a help for new qualitative researchers, some of the issues, concepts, and arguments involved are outlined, and the relevancy of the standard objections is discussed. Alternative conceptions of qualitative research, coming from phenomenological and hermeneutical traditions, are suggested. The qualitative interview based on conversation and interaction here appears as a privileged access to a linguistically constituted social world
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Paul Smeyers (1998). Assembling Reminders for Educational Research: Wittgenstein on Philosophy. Educational Theory 48 (3):287-308.
Similar books and articles
Steinar Kvale (1983). The Qualitative Research Interview. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology 14 (1):171-196.
Sonali K. Shah & Kevin G. Corley, Building Better Theory by Bridging the Quantitative-Qualitative Divide.
Luis Cabrera (2009). An Archaeology of Borders: Qualitative Political Theory as a Tool in Addressing Moral Distance. Journal of Global Ethics 5 (2):109-123.
Mats Johansson & Linus Broström (2012). Empirical Fallacies in the Debate on Substituted Judgment. Health Care Analysis (1):1-9.
Thomas Hadjistavropoulos & William E. Smythe (2001). Elements of Risk in Qualitative Research. Ethics and Behavior 11 (2):163 – 174.
Pamela S. Maykut (1994). Beginning Qualitative Research: A Philosophic and Practical Guide. Falmer Press.
Atsushi Asai, Motoki Ohnishi, Etsuyo Nishigaki, Miho Sekimoto, Shunichi Fukuhara & Tsuguya Fukui (2004). Focus Group Interviews Examining Attitudes Towards Medical Research Among the Japanese: A Qualitative Study. Bioethics 18 (5):448–470.
Iain Hay (ed.) (2000). Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography. Oxford University Press.
Marjo Elisa Siltaoja (2006). Value Priorities as Combining Core Factors Between CSR and Reputation – a Qualitative Study. Journal of Business Ethics 68 (1):91 - 111.
Roshan D. Ahuja, Mary Walker & Raghu Tadepalli (2001). Paternalism, Limited Paternalism and the Pontius Pilate Plight When Researching Children. Journal of Business Ethics 32 (1):81 - 92.
Denise E. DeLorme, George M. Sinkhan & Warren French (2001). Ethics and the Internet Issues Associated with Qualitative Research. Journal of Business Ethics 33 (4):271 - 286.
Doug Brugge & Alison Kole (2003). A Case Study of Community-Based Participatory Research Ethics: The Healthy Public Housing Initiative. Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (4):485-501.
Alan Wertheimer (2013). Is Payment a Benefit? Bioethics 27 (2):105-116.
Added to index2010-09-02
Total downloads116 ( #24,530 of 1,726,249 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #231,316 of 1,726,249 )
How can I increase my downloads?