Abstract
Qualitative researchers contest and reject the criteria used by quantitative researchers when evaluating their work: those of reliability, validity and generalisability. Instead, qualitative researchers have developed alternative criteria responsive to their specific research ideals. These criteria encompass various dimensions of ‘rigour’, ‘ethical integrity’ and ‘artistry’.
This article attempts to show something of the range of evaluative criteria available to qualitative researchers, arguing that their choice of criteria needs to be compatible with the special nature of the research in question (its methodology, aims and assumptions). Occupational therapists are encouraged to be clear, thoughtful and reflexive about their position and values when evaluating their research. To this end, recent occupational therapy research is reviewed to identify the criteria that authors favour. I also proffer my own reflexive voice towards critically evaluating my approach in this article.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.