Cited by 40Qualitative Research Methods and ApplicationsEducational Research and MethodsDoctoral Education Challenges and Solutions

Graduate education in qualitative methods in U.S. psychology: current trends and recommendations for the future

Rubin, Jennifer D., Bell, Sarah, McClelland, Sara I.·2018·Qualitative Research in Psychology

Abstract

The visibility of qualitative research methods (QRM) in U.S. psychology has increased with the dissemination of qualitative research in journals and books, formation of professional and scientific organizations, and recognition in educational institutions. While gains have been made, the current state of doctoral training in qualitative methods remains uncertain. It is unclear what training graduate students receive in U.S. psychology programs about qualitative methodologies and how further gains can be made in expanding visibility of QRM in graduate education. In this mixed-methods study, we surveyed a sample of faculty in U.S. psychology graduate programs about the frequency of QRM course offerings, graduate training, and students’ use of QRM in their dissertation research. We also explored qualitative responses from faculty regarding their attitudes about QRM and how these attitudes might help increase or diminish the frequency of methods training available to students. We found that even within graduate programs where there was support for QRM, enduring perceptions about the value of qualitative research limit faculty and graduate students’ use of qualitative methodologies in their research. With these findings in mind, we offer several recommendations for increasing the visibility of QRM in U.S. graduate education and the discipline of psychology as a whole.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14780887.2017.1392668

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Only 13% of responding graduate psychology programs required a course in qualitative research.

    “They reported that only 13% of the responding programs required a course in qualitative research.”

    From The pursuit of quality in grounded theory (2021) · cites this paper as Rubin, Bell, and McCleland (2018)

  • Rubin, Bell, and McCleland found negative judgments about qualitative inquiry that had long been evident in the discipline.

    “Rubin, Bell, and McCleland (2018) document the above concerns in their mixed methods study of graduate psychology programs.They found negative judgments about qualitative inquiry that had long been evident in the discipline.”

    From The pursuit of quality in grounded theory (2021) · cites this paper as Rubin, Bell, and McCleland (2018)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rubin, J. D., Bell, S., & McClelland, S. I.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Rubin, Jennifer D.
Venue
Qualitative Research in Psychology
Published
2017-11-21
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
29-50
ISSN
  • 1478-0887 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-0895
OpenAlex
W2765996257
Cited by
40
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1
FWCI
12.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Qualitative Research in Psychology (publishedVersion)
Funders
Division of Graduate Education
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Research and Methods
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Doctoral Education Challenges and Solutions
Keywords
qualitative research, graduate education, doctoral education, psychology graduate programs, faculty attitudes, doctoral research, training recommendations

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