Standards for qualitative research

Abstract

One of the greatest obstacles to the identification of excellence in qualitative studies is the lack of generally accepted criteria. The criteria developed for quantitative studies are based on a different set of assumptions and are not appropriate. Those who critique qualitative studies need context flexibility, skills in inductive reasoning, skills in theory analysis, and the capacity to transform ideas across levels of abstraction. The following standards are proposed for critique of qualitative studies: (a) descriptive vividness; (b) methodological congruence; (c) analytic preciseness; (d) theoretical connectedness; and (e) heuristic relevance. Methodological congruence has four elements: rigor in documentation; procedural rigor; ethical rigor; and auditability. Heuristic relevance has three elements: intuitive recognition; relationship to existing body of knowledge; and applicability. Threats to each of these standards are identified. Creative strategies for improving the published presentation of qualitative studies must be developed to allow adequate critique.