8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      A matter of taste: evaluating the quality of qualitative research

      Nursing Inquiry
      Wiley-Blackwell

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Driven by an impetus to standardize, numerous checklists have been devised to address quality in qualitative research, but these standards and the mindset driving them offer no language with which to speak about taste, or the aesthetic sensibilities that play such a key role in evaluating the goodness of any object. In this article, quality appraisal in qualitative research is considered in the context of taste, that is, in the discernment involved in judging the value of research and in the recognition of the key role reviewer preferences, sensibilities and membership in one or more taste communities play in these judgements. The evaluation of a study is accomplished by evaluating one or more reports from that study, and such reports may be conceived as art forms amenable to the same criteria for appraisal as poems or paintings. Taste implies judgements about the quality of objects and a person's ability to sift through and select from a store of knowledge that knowledge appropriate to judge its value. What binds a community of practitioners (here reviewers of qualitative studies) together is taste-making, or the constant refinements of judgements concerning what constitutes good and bad practice.

          Related collections

          Most cited references30

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A comparative analysis of three online appraisal instruments' ability to assess validity in qualitative research.

          The concept of validity has been a central component in critical appraisal exercises evaluating the methodological quality of quantitative studies. Reactions by qualitative researchers have been mixed in relation to whether or not validity should be applied to qualitative research and if so, what criteria should be used to distinguish high-quality articles from others. We compared three online critical appraisal instruments' ability to facilitate an assessment of validity. Many reviewers have used the critical appraisal skills program (CASP) tool to complete their critical appraisal exercise; however, CASP appears to be less sensitive to aspects of validity than the evaluation tool for qualitative studies (ETQS) and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tool. The ETQS provides detailed instructions on how to interpret criteria; however, it is the JBI tool, with its focus on congruity, that appears to be the most coherent.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Appealing Work: An Investigation of How Ethnographic Texts Convince

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Reframing the evaluation of qualitative health research: reflections on a review of appraisal guidelines in the health sciences.

              In this article, we explore the form of evaluation put forward by guidelines used in the health sciences for appraising qualitative research and we begin to articulate an alternative posture. Most guidelines are derivative of the modes of assessment developed by clinical epidemiologists as part of the promotion of evidence-based medicine (EBM). They are predominantly proceduralist in orientation, equating quality with the proper execution of research techniques. We argue that this form of judgment assumes a fixed relationship between research practice and knowledge generated, and tends to over-simplify and standardize the complex and non-formulaic nature of qualitative inquiry. A concern with methods as objects of judgment in and of themselves restricts the reader's field of vision to the research process and diverts attention away from the analytic content of the research. We propose an alternative 'substantive' perspective that focuses on the analysis put forward, and regards methods as resources for engaging with and understanding the substantive findings and topic of inquiry. An important challenge is to find a way to embody such a form of judgment in practical assessment tools.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Nursing Inquiry
                Nurs Inq
                Wiley-Blackwell
                13207881
                June 2015
                June 12 2015
                : 22
                : 2
                : 86-94
                Article
                10.1111/nin.12080
                25213076
                7fe69d77-22e6-4f76-a8df-5d9fac2a202a
                © 2015

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article