CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 467Qualitative Research Methods and EthicsQualitative Research Methods and ApplicationsPhenomenology and Existential Philosophy

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Bracketing in qualitative research: Conceptual and practical matters

Fischer, Constance T.·2009·Psychotherapy Research
DOI 10.1080/10503300902798375
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Bracketing is presented as two forms of researcher engagement: with data and with evolving findings. The first form is the well-known identification and temporary setting aside of the researcher's assumptions. The second engagement is the hermeneutic revisiting of data and of one's evolving comprehension of it in light of a revised understanding of any aspect of the topic. Both of these processes are ongoing, and they include the careful development of language with which to represent findings. Extensive everyday examples of bracketing and of interviewing are presented. As a form of disclosure in qualitative research, the background from which this article was written is shared. At that point, Husserl's and Heidegger's historical introductions of bracketing are presented briefly, followed by a discussion of reflexivity and hermeneutics. The article closes with warnings of how residual positivism can work against qualitative rigor and with a suggested qualitative research study on bracketing.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10503300902798375

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 18 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Fischer C. T., 1979, Duquesne studies in phenomenological psychology, 3, 135
  2. Giorgi A., 1970, Psychology as a human science: A phenomenological approach
  3. Hofrichter D., 1976, Dissertation Abstracts International, 37, 1029
  4. Ward W., 1977, Dissertation Abstracts International, 38, 5600B

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 467

Related

Metadata

Authors
Fischer, C. T.
Affiliations
Duquesne University (US)
Corresponding author
Fischer, Constance T.
Venue
Psychotherapy Research
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2009-07
Volume
19
Issue
4-5
Pages
583-590
ISSN
  • 1050-3307 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-4381
DOI
10.1080/10503300902798375
OpenAlex
W2109324538
Cited by
467
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 9
FWCI
19.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychotherapy Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy
Keywords
bracketing, researcher assumptions, hermeneutics, reflexivity, qualitative research rigor, Edmund Husserl, Martin Heidegger
MeSH terms
Humans, Psychology

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