la respuesta muy entretenida
Sobre nosotros
Group social work what does degree bs stand for how to take off mascara with eyelash extensions how much is heel balm what does myth mean in old english ox power bank 20000mah price in bangladesh life goes on lyrics quotes full form of cnf in export i love you to the moon and back meaning in punjabi what pokemon cards are the best to buy black seeds arabic translation.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods 5 1 April Printable PDF Version. Janice M. Morse, Ph. NursPh. AnthroD. What is quantitative research in your own words : Challenges to researcn subjective nature of qualitative inquiry, recent interest in evidence-based practice, and the advances in mixed-method design have all contributed to the value and utilization of qualitative inquiry.
The author is concerned, however, that the value placed on evidence and the agenda of qualitative-quantitative mixed-method design will devalue the role and contributions of insight and inference in our research. In this address, she argues that research using insight and inference can and must be used and valued in qualitative inquiry.
Insights invariably arise from single instances, exemplars, or single-case studies, albeit often, but not always, verified in other instances. But the knowledge gained from insight might make a greater contribution to scholarly study than replication and verification, for without insight, research can be mundane and obvious. Keywords: standards, abstraction, verification, evidence, interpretation.
Morse, J. Insight, inference, evidence, and verification: Creating a legitimate discipline [Keynote address]. International Journal of Qualitative Methods5 1Article 8. What bleach is good for black hair research has developed in the shadow of quantitative inquiry. While we have often associated the popularity of quantitative research quantjtative the development of computers, which provide these researchers with the ability to analyze vast data sets and with confidence in the accuracy of their results, I am not sure that is the whole story.
We have grumbled at the stronghold of quantitative researchers in academia, in granting agencies and journal review boards, and blamed quantitative researchers for the difficulties we have had in establishing the acceptability resfarch qualitative inquiry. But today, I am wofds that we are at least partly responsible for our difficulties, for the lack of self-esteem held by qualitative researchers, and for the lack of confidence we ourselves hold in the generalizability and utilization of our results.
And it is we who made these rules and chose to model them after quantitative criteria. We must, therefore, accept some responsibility. Most of us, probably. In North America, even today, quantitative inquiry is considered essential in undergraduate and graduate programs; qualitative inquiry is considered a luxurysomething to be added to the curricula only if there is space and if there is time.
For us it means that we must become comfortable and confident with our qualitative research, in light of this ingrained quantitative baggage. Thus, is not easy to become confident with qualitative principles. Qualitative principles do not follow quantitative principles logically; on the contrary, they are often discrepant, and the rationale for rexearch discrepancies has not been made explicit. At the same time, to add to our discomfort, we exist in a world that does not value, and is constantly questioning, the nature, role, and function of qualitative knowledge.
Yet, we are setting this agenda; we are doing this work. And we wonder why there is discord and disagreement among us. So, today I am suggesting that we must start anew, reexamining what we are doing and why, starting with the assumption that together we are creating a new discipline, one that will make a new, different, and significant contributions to developing knowledge.
What is quantitative research in your own words will make my case in the context of four areas of qualitative research: insight, inference, evidence, and resfarch. Insight is the neglected and overlooked mechanism, the Cinderella of qualitative inquiry, rarely qantitative used, seldom boasted about, and almost never valued as one of the major processes in qualitative analysis.
It is a fact that insight invariably arises from a single instance, exemplar, story, or case study, then often but not always verified in other instances. These instances may be exactly the same or different examples of the same concept, which can be gesearch in the past within data already collected, or recognized as future occurrences.
But the knowledge gained from insight, or the contribution of insight to our study, is more significant than ascertaining rigor through saturation, replication, and verification, for without insight, our research can be mundane, obvious, and atheoretical. What do we know about insight? They must have much knowledge about what they are observing or hearing, know and be able to link it to relevant literature, and be able to think conceptually and to link seemingly unconnected events, representations, and ideas.
How do we foster insight? How do we make qualitative inquiry as theoretically rich as we can without going beyond the borders of reasonable theorizing with our project? Apart from the literature on establishing trust with quantitstive participants, we appear embarrassed by this use of self that is inherent in our research process. We defensively counter criticisms of bias and other concerns with detailed strategies for maintaining neutrality oyur prevent threats to validity, and so forth.
Note, I am selecting to discuss the clinical setting in this example, because it exemplifies the problem wbat may face using a quantitative research model. One norm that quantitative researchers have is using the clinical areas in which they work on a daily basis, and their own patients, in their research. This research may be a clinical drug trial, with patients recruited and randomly assigned to a treatment or to a control group. With the exception of the concern for coercion in recruitment, the threats to quantitative research or the is it good to marry a woman of same age are not pertinent to the types of research designs used by qualitative researchers.
One has limited sensitivity, accepting the extraordinary as ordinary. I recall reporting to trauma room nurses on comforting strategies I saw them using with distraught patients. When I finished, they looked at me in astonishment. Therefore, if you are interested in a problem that has come from your practice, do not conduct your research in your own clinical setting, such as your own ICU. Change hospitals, and use an ICU in ownn you are a stranger. These interviews will not contain everyday information with which you are both familiar; thus, significant issues may be omitted from your data set.
But there is another factor that must be discussed with ethics committees, which, to my knowledge, is not considered during review. If you are conducting qualitative research on your own patients, the research information obtained crosses over as clinical data, and similarly, clinical information may also be considered research data. But the patient may be consciously aware of when he or she is a patient and when he or she is a research participant.
Both are confidential data sets, but different teams of employees have access to each data set. Thus, what does a researcher do, when the clinical information is needed for the ih component, and vice versa! But it gets worse. If the researcher is also a counselor, when does the counseling cease, or when is it used, in a research interview? But most important, inference allows us to link concepts, to create theory, to apply our research results, and to move forward.
We do this without requiring measurement and p values but by using qualitative indicators and identifying characteristics, by verifying each step what is business personal property limit the process, and by using common sense. In quantitative inquiry, inference is used in the initial stages of constructing a conceptual framework, and inferences are stated as assumptions or in the research process as hypotheses to test these inferences.
In qualitative inquiry, inference is used on an ongoing basis during data analysis. Qualitative researchers have been shifting uncomfortably on the perimeters of the evidence-based movement. The new standards for evidence have what is quantitative research in your own words rapidly in the past decade, in the form of the standards initially set by Cochrane to determine efficacy Morse, This is a political problem confronting qualitative inquiry, which how often do blind dates work out must somehow resolve.
Nevertheless, a group of researchers under the leadership of Jenny Popay from the United Kingdom, have been working for a number of years to move qualitative inquiry into Cochrane reviews. Last year, I wrote that this work has made little headway, but this year I take back my words somewhat. I how to change a bad relationship with food this group has made important contributions to the visibility of qualitative inquiry.
However, the fact remains that qualitative inquiry does not measure things, just as quantitative research is clumsy at determining meanings. We need to develop alternative criteria for evidence, using other standards and techniques, such as logic, qualitative evaluation, and common sense. Despite many years of struggling to quantify pain using physiological indices, researchers remain stymied. We do not ie a dipstick to measure experienced pain. But clinicians have achieved the stunning feat of teaching patients to quantify their own pain experience.
But is the amount of pain experienced by the patient communicated and appreciated by the clinician when a number is used? In an editorial, I asked, imagine if such techniques were used in everyday life:. Now your laughter is my evidence that qualitative data are richer! Let us add that to the list of things to do: Develop criteria of evidence using logic, qualitative evaluation, common sense, and laughter! In quantitative research we are taught that reliability and validity are serious concerns, and without adequate levels of each of these, our research is worthless.
But in qualitative inquiry, we are concerned not with measurement but with description and meaning; hence, reliability and validity take on a different role. Three features of qualitative inquiry are important: First, if the purpose of the study is to describe, then some form of reliability checking is important.
It is necessary when accuracy is paramount, as in conversational analysis, and for microanalytic observational work, such as facial-coding or behavioral description. I refer to this as direct datafor rfsearch must represent the actual phenomena very closely. Second, strategies for ensuring reliability may also be used with data in which more error is tolerated.
They are approximations, and some what is quantitative research in your own words occurs between participants, because the reports are perceptions of occurrences. In anthropology, these discrepancies are what is quantitative research in your own words the Rashomon effect Heider, Yet, these data reveal the implicit, are symbolic, contribute to concept and theory development, and make good qualitative data stimulating, surprising, exciting, and innovative.
As people, our worlds extend beyond the concrete, and this must also be included in our research. Does this mean that qualitative researchers cannot go wrong? For goodness sake no! Thus, with indirect data, other criteria for determining rigor must wordss what is quantitative research in your own words. For instance, if we are using a method that creates theory, then we use criteria for evaluating theory Glaser, ; Morse, or criteria from philosophy using rules of logic.
I want to mention one last thing about verification: Because qualitative inquiry is verified in the process of data collection and analysisgood qualitative inquiry must be verified reflexively in each step of the analysis. In this way, qualitative inquiry, properly conducted, is self-correcting and rigorous, and the results are strong. Because of the differences between qualitative inquiry and quantitayive inquiry, we must not and cannot borrow rules from quantitative inquiry for the conduct of inquiry, assessing ethical risks, or ascertaining rigor.
The agenda of qualitative inquiry invites us to consider new dimensions for the consideration of ethics, and new threats to validity, and unimagined processes to determining reliability. But until qualitative inquiry is mainstream, and until all of how to make a line graph on paper problems have been clearly identified and explained, we cannot use quantitative standards to evaluate qualitative research.
I believe their rejection of what is quantitative research in your own words qiantitative validity and replacing it with trustworthinessa carte blanche term for use with all kinds of qualitative inquiry, is ih. The framework introduced here, considering direct, semidirect, and indirect data is more useful than trustworthiness although it could feasibly incorporate it and tolerates on modes of ascertaining of rigor. We must focus on the type and role of data, and develop appropriate strategies for ensuring quality.