© 1999 Evidence-Based Mental Health
EBMH notebook
Evaluating qualitative research
Department of Psychology Miami University Oxford, Ohio, USA
Correspondence to:
Please address correspondence to William B. Stiles, Department of Psychology, Miami University, Oxford, OH 45056, USA. Email stileswb@muohio.edu.
Many qualitative investigators explicitly reject the possibility of absolute objectivity and truth. The concept of objectivity is replaced by the concept of permeability, the capacity of understanding to be changed by encounters with observations. Investigators argue that we cannot view reality from outside of our own frame of reference. Instead, good practice in research seeks to ensure that understanding is permeated by observation. Investigator bias can be reframed as impermeability (interpretations not permeated by empirical observations). Good practice in reporting seeks to show readers how understanding has been changed. The traditional goal of truth of
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Brown, C., Lloyd, K.
(2001). Qualitative methods in psychiatric research. Adv. Psychiatr. Treat.
7: 350-356
[Full Text]
Services
- Email this link to a friend
- Similar articles in this journal
- Add article to my folders
- Download to citation manager
- Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Google Scholar
PubMed
Bookmark with
Register for free content
The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.
Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.
