Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Checklists can be useful improving qualitative research methods, but overzealous and uncritical use can be counterproductive Reducing qualitative research to a list of technical procedures (such as purposive sampling, grounded theory, multiple coding, triangulation, and respondent validation) is overly prescriptive and results in “the tail wagging the dog” None of these “technical fixes” in itself confers rigour; they can strengthen the rigour of qualitative research only if embedded in a broader understanding of qualitative research design and data analysis Otherwise we risk compromising the unique contribution that systematic qualitative research can make to health services research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rosaline S. Barbour (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: