What question did this study set out to answer?

This paper argues that rejecting generative AI in qualitative analysis limits discourse and progress.

February 21, 2026Open Access

Why We Should Reject to Reject the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Qualitative Analysis: A Response to Jowsey, Braun, Clarke, Lupton, and Fine (2025)

Puntos clave

This paper argues that rejecting generative AI in qualitative analysis limits discourse and progress.
Position paper format
Critical analysis of Jowsey et al.’s arguments
Examination of philosophical underpinnings
Emphasizes the importance of generative AI in enriching qualitative research
Suggests that dogmatic rejection could hinder methodological advancements
Advocates for open debate about the use of AI in qualitative analysis

Resumen

This position paper argues against the categorical rejection of generative Artificial Intelligence (genAI) in qualitative analysis, as proposed by Jowsey et al. in their open letter published in Qualitative Inquiry . While their concerns are framed as methodological, the authors’ position largely rests on philosophical assumptions that risk becoming dogma. In this short response I contend that prohibiting genAI on metaphysical grounds negatively impacts debate and innovation in qualitative analysis.

Leer artículo completoexternamente

Me gusta

Guardar

Ver artículo completo

Cite This Study

Stefano De Paoli (Wed,) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69994c27873532290d02068c https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004261425137

Me gusta

Guardar

Ver artículo completo