Methodology or method? A critical review of qualitative case study reports.
Methodology or method? A critical review of qualitative case study reports.
复制标题
DOI:
10.3402/qhw.v9.23606
复制
发表时间:
2014
影响因子:
1.8
通讯作者:
Dickson-Swift V
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Hyett N;Kenny A;Dickson-Swift V
Despite on-going debate about credibility, and reported limitations in comparison to other approaches, case study is an increasingly popular approach among qualitative researchers. We critically analysed the methodological descriptions of published case studies. Three high-impact qualitative methods journals were searched to locate case studies published in the past 5 years; 34 were selected for analysis. Articles were categorized as health and health services (n=12), social sciences and anthropology (n=7), or methods (n=15) case studies. The articles were reviewed using an adapted version of established criteria to determine whether adequate methodological justification was present, and if study aims, methods, and reported findings were consistent with a qualitative case study approach. Findings were grouped into five themes outlining key methodological issues: case study methodology or method, case of something particular and case selection, contextually bound case study, researcher and case interactions and triangulation, and study design inconsistent with methodology reported. Improved reporting of case studies by qualitative researchers will advance the methodology for the benefit of researchers and practitioners.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子:
3.2
作者:
Barone, Timi Lynne
通讯作者:
Barone, Timi Lynne
影响因子:
2
作者:
Bassey, M
通讯作者:
Bassey, M
影响因子:
3.2
作者:
Fincham, Ben;Scourfield, Jonathan;Langer, Susanne
通讯作者:
Langer, Susanne
影响因子:
3.6
作者:
Buckley, Charles A.;Waring, Michael J.
通讯作者:
Waring, Michael J.
影响因子:
3.2
作者:
Fourie, Chantel L.;Theron, Linda C.
通讯作者:
Theron, Linda C.