Evolving guidelines for publication of qualitative research studies in psychology and related fields

Abstract

We present a set of evolving guidelines for reviewing qualitative research, to serve four functions: to contribute to the process of legitimizing qualitative research; to ensure more appropriate and valid scientific reviews of qualitative manuscripts, theses, and dissertations; to encourage better quality control in qualitative research through better self- and other-monitoring; and to encourage further developments in approach and method. Building on a review of existing principles of good practice in qualitative research, we used an iterative process of revision and feedback from colleagues who engage in qualitative research, resulting in a set of seven guidelines common to both qualitative and quantitative research and seven guidelines especially pertinent to qualitative investigations in psychology and related social sciences. The Evolving Guidelines are subject to continuing revision and should not be used in a rigid manner, in order to avoid stifling creativity in this rapidly evolving, rich research tradition.

‘Between a rock and a hard place’: family members’ experiences of supporting a relative with bipolar disorder

“…Some aspects of good practice guidelines (Barker, Pistrang & Elliott, 2016;Elliott, Fischer & Rennie, 1999) do not seem to have been adhered to, such as disclosure of the researcher's perspective (Granek et al, 2016;Jönsson et al, 2011;Maskill et al, 2010;Rusner et al, 2012;Tranvag & Kristokkerson, 2008); and the carrying out of credibility checks through 'analytic auditing' (Rusner et al, 2012Tranvag & Kristokkerson, 2008 or 'testimonial validity' (Jönsson et al, 2011;Maskill et al, 2010;Rusner et al, 2012). These limitations reduce the confidence that can be placed in their findings.…”

“…In line with good practice guidelines for qualitative research (Barker & Pistrang, 2005;Elliott et al, 1999;Santiago-Delefosse, Gavin, Bruchez, Roux & Stephen, 2016), a number of methods were used to ensure the credibility of the results. A consensus approach was employed throughout the process of data collection and analysis.…”

“…In accordance with good practice guidelines (Barker & Pistrang, 2005;Elliott et al, 1999), the author's perspective is outlined, in order to aid the reader in and that manic episodes might be particularly challenging.…”

The postnatal support needs of mothers with an intellectual disability

“…A final master table of super-ordinate and subthemes was produced. The researcher also conducted a credibility check (Elliot et al, 1999) using an independent assessor to evaluate the themes.…”

Tips for research recruitment: The views of sexual minority youth

“…It is important to 'own one's perspective' when conducting qualitative research (Elliott, Fischer, & Rennie, 1999), and from the outset the interviewer/MFGL was open about certain professional and personal details. MFGL was known to all of the participants, as they had met prior to the interview (i.e.…”