Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

To trust or not to trust? Interpretations in qualitative research

To trust or not to trust? Interpretations in qualitative research Interpretations of data in qualitative research may be biased for many reasons. This paper explores three commonly overlooked problems from a rather positivist point of view and deals with them mainly through the lens of cognitive psychology and survey methodology. The first problem is that researchers and readers of the research tend to trust retrospective data too much even though it is known that our memory is highly reconstructive. The second problem is that we often create interpretations too quickly and do not ground them in data well. The third problem is inappropriately generalising our findings because we underrate the variability of the phenomena studied. The aim is not to employ quantitative criteria in qualitative research but to show that especially in cases where we seek more objectivity (e.g., factual information about events) and less about the subjective phenomenal world (e.g., how people perceive these events from today’s perspective), cognitive psychology or survey methodology can offer valuable insights. Recommendations about what researchers should be careful of and how to increase the objectivity of the interpretations are offered. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Human Affairs Springer Journals

To trust or not to trust? Interpretations in qualitative research

Neusar, Aleš
Human Affairs , Volume 24 (2) – Mar 29, 2014
Download PDF
11 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/to-trust-or-not-to-trust-interpretations-in-qualitative-research-n0stDbqbxW

References (67)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2014 by Versita Warsaw and Springer-Verlag Wien
Subject
Social Sciences, general; Sociology, general; Quality of Life Research; Humanities, general
ISSN
1210-3055
eISSN
1337-401X
DOI
10.2478/s13374-014-0218-9
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Interpretations of data in qualitative research may be biased for many reasons. This paper explores three commonly overlooked problems from a rather positivist point of view and deals with them mainly through the lens of cognitive psychology and survey methodology. The first problem is that researchers and readers of the research tend to trust retrospective data too much even though it is known that our memory is highly reconstructive. The second problem is that we often create interpretations too quickly and do not ground them in data well. The third problem is inappropriately generalising our findings because we underrate the variability of the phenomena studied. The aim is not to employ quantitative criteria in qualitative research but to show that especially in cases where we seek more objectivity (e.g., factual information about events) and less about the subjective phenomenal world (e.g., how people perceive these events from today’s perspective), cognitive psychology or survey methodology can offer valuable insights. Recommendations about what researchers should be careful of and how to increase the objectivity of the interpretations are offered.

Journal

Human Affairs – Springer Journals

Published: Mar 29, 2014

There are no references for this article.