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.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
