Qualitative research serves an important function in the advancement of knowledge. It is used to explore new phenomena, examine under-researched areas, develop new measures, or build theory. Qualitative research tends to answer research questions that address "how" or "why." Health services research has been more open to publishing qualitative research than some other disciplines. Many social sciences disciplines have been skeptical of qualitative research because of the belief that it is "too subjective." Thus, it is essential for authors to demonstrate the rigor of their methods. It is not enough for authors to essentially say, "we did some interviews and here are some quotes." At HCMR we look for evidence of rigor when considering qualitative papers for publication.
Just as with quantitative research, rigor is demonstrated by identifying gaps in the literature, explaining and justifying the method used, and demonstrating reliability and validity of the analysis and interpretation of results. The relevant literature should be considered, both topic-related and method-related. The paper should identify a clear gap in the literature. Tell the reader what is known about the problem, what we still need to learn, and why qualitative research is the best approach. Identification of the problem should be clear and compelling, and a clear research question should be articulated.
There are numerous specific qualitative approaches, and the selected approach should be justified based on the research question. Many authors assume that all qualitative research is "grounded theory," but grounded theory is only one approach, and it has specific steps. Green and Thorogood (2004) asserted that, "grounded theory is perhaps one of the most abused phrases in the qualitative health services literature" (p.183). There are many good qualitative research books available that explain the various approaches, including the one cited here.
The study's method section should provide enough detail that readers could replicate the study based on the information provided. Be transparent about the interviewers' backgrounds, and how they were related to the participants. Explain any ethics concerns, and information about the sample. Explaining the context is important to help readers assess the authors' interpretations of the data. Typically, at least two investigators should independently review the data and establish codes, and inter-rater reliability should be addressed. Validity can be addressed by explaining how the key themes emerged from the data. Sometimes it makes sense to provide actual frequency counts of phenomena mentioned, or the percentage of participants who mentioned the same theme. Illustrative quotes from participants are enlightening, and can help readers understand how the investigators interpreted the data. Provide enough information about the study's reliability and validity that readers don't suspect the themes and quotes were cherry-picked to fit with the investigators' pre-conceived ideas. Finally, the paper should explicitly tie back to the research question and explain how the findings contribute to the literature.
Including these essentials in a qualitative manuscript will ensure to readers that the study was conducted in a systematic, rigorous manner, and will contribute to HCMR's mission of promoting high-quality management research.
Larry R. Hearld, PhD
Cheryl Rathert, PhD
Co-Editors-in-Chief
Reference