The DOI matches its Crossref record; 74 of the 74 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Issues of validity in openly ideological research: Between a rock and a soft place
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research.
Wagner, H. R., Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1968) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2575405 · Cited by 46,361
The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014 · Cited by 39,449
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Kuhn, T. S., & Schlegel, R. (1963) · Physics Today · doi:10.1063/1.3050879 · Cited by 35,538
Construct validity in psychological tests.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0040957 · Cited by 11,195
In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development
GILLIGAN, C. (1993) · doi:10.4159/9780674037618 · Cited by 9,127
Mills, C. W. (1959) · The Mississippi Valley Historical Review · doi:10.2307/1891592 · Cited by 8,191
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Hall, M. B., & Kuhn, T. S. (1963) · The American Historical Review · doi:10.2307/1847040 · Cited by 7,479
Learning to Labor: How Working Class Kids Get Working Class Jobs.
Hagan, J., & Willis, P. (1996) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2077050 · Cited by 5,735
Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries
Guba, E. G. (1981) · ECTJ · doi:10.1007/bf02766777 · Cited by 5,527
The two disciplines of scientific psychology.
Cronbach, L. J. (1957) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/h0043943 · Cited by 2,523
Cited by
Qualitative Quality: Eight “Big-Tent” Criteria for Excellent Qualitative Research
Tracy, S. J. (2010) · Qualitative Inquiry · doi:10.1177/1077800410383121 · Cited by 7,536
Toward a definition of mixed methods research
Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007) · Journal of Mixed Methods Research · doi:10.1177/1558689806298224 · Cited by 6,464
Pillow, W. (2003) · International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education · doi:10.1080/0951839032000060635 · Cited by 2,093
‘Clear as Mud’: Toward Greater Clarity in Generic Qualitative Research
Caelli, K., Ray, L., & Mill, J. (2003) · International Journal of Qualitative Methods · doi:10.1177/160940690300200201 · Cited by 1,256
Validity in qualitative research revisited
Cho, J., & Trent, A. (2006) · Qualitative Research · doi:10.1177/1468794106065006 · Cited by 1,037
Metadata
- Authors
- Lather, P.
- Venue
- Interchange
- Published
- 1986-12
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 63-84
- ISSN
- 0020-5230 (ISSN-L)
- 0826-4805
- 1573-1790
- OpenAlex
- W1968482177
- Cited by
- 1,016
- References
- 74
- FWCI
- 26.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Issues of validity in openly ideological research: Between a rock and a soft place. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/bf01807017
- The paper
- Lather, P. (1986). Issues of validity in openly ideological research: Between a rock and a soft place. Interchange. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01807017
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
