Are qualitative methods misunderstood?

24Citations
Citations of this article
51Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Qualitative research methods are increasingly utilised by health researchers. Along with this the criteria for assessing the quality of qualitative research are changing from a natural science model to an interpretative social science model. This is a product of the realisation by health researchers that qualitative methods utilise a different epistemology to statistical methods. I demonstrate that a recent article in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health draws on a now outdated natural science methodology of assessing bias in focus groups. Drawing on interpretativist social science theory and recent work in the British Medical Journal. I argue for the importance of examining the social contexts through which qualitative data is produced.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ezzy, D. (2001). Are qualitative methods misunderstood? Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health. Public Health Association of Australia Inc. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-842X.2001.tb00582.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free