Content area
Full text
Contents
- Abstract
- Challenges for Reviewers and Journal Editors
- Training in Qualitative Methods
- Diverse Goals and Approaches to Inquiry
- Knowing What We Do Not Know
- Knowing Whom to Trust
- Challenges for Authors
- Inconsistent Design and Review Expectations
- Page Limits and Inappropriate Publishing Guidelines
- Challenges Related to the Transition Toward Qualitative Methods
- Reducing Methods to Singular Variants or to Key Procedures
- Question-Guided Versus Fixed-Procedure Research Design
- Valuing Qualitative Methods Only When Quantified or Supplemental
- A Diversity of Qualitative Research Approaches and Goals
- Task Force Aims and Procedures
- A Singular Framework for Methodological Integrity
- Methodological Integrity as the Basis for Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research
- Methodological integrity
- Fidelity to the subject matter
- Utility in achieving goals
- Guidelines for Considering Central Processes: A Framework for Understanding Integrity
- Fidelity to the Subject Matter: Guidelines and Principles
- Adequate data
- Applying this principle in research design
- Applying this principle in research review
- Perspective management in data collection
- Applying this principle in research design
- Applying this principle in research review
- Perspective management in data analysis
- Applying this principle in research design
- Applying this principle in research review
- Groundedness
- Applying this principle in research design
- Applying this principle in research review
- Utility in Achieving Goals: Guidelines and Principles
- Contextualization of data
- Applying this principle in research design
- Applying this principle in research review
- Catalyst for insight
- Applying this principle in research design
- Applying this principle in research review
- Meaningful contributions
- Applying this principle in research design
- Applying this principle in research review
- Coherence among findings
- Applying this principle in research design
- Applying this principle in research review
- Methodological integrity revisited
- Recommendations for Journal Editors and Editorial Boards
- Conclusion
Figures and Tables
Abstract
The current paper presents recommendations from the Task Force on Resources for the Publication of Qualitative Research of the Society for Qualitative Inquiry in Psychology, a section of Division 5 of the American Psychological Association. This initiative was a response to concerns by authors that reviews of qualitative research articles frequently utilize inflexible sets of procedures and provide contradictory feedback when evaluating acceptability. In response, the Task Force proposes the concept of methodological integrity and recommends its evaluation via its two composite processes: (a) fidelity to the subject matter, which is the process by which...