Ensuring rigour in qualitative research
Abstract
The issues of reliability and validity in qualitative research are not as readily codified as has been the case for quantitative research. However, a variety of methods do exist and are reviewed here. This general review is followed by a detailed illustration of selected techniques, including the use of counting in qualitative research, the development of systematic coding schemes with the aid of computer programmes, searching for deviant cases and the use of the transcription techniques of conversation analysis. The examples given are drawn from a variety of studies conducted by the authors.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The greatest potential of multiple coding lies in its capacity to furnish alternative interpretations and thereby to act as the "devil's advocate" in alerting researchers to all potentially competing explanations.
“The greatest potential of multiple coding lies in its capacity to furnish alternative interpretations and thereby to act as the “devil's advocate” implied in many of the checklists1–3 in alerting researchers to all potentially competing explanations.”
From Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? (2001) · cites this paper as [3]
Checklists have contributed to the wider acceptance of qualitative research methods and to convincing potential sceptics of its thoroughness.
“Checklists have played an important role in conferring respectability on qualitative research and in convincing potential sceptics of its thoroughness.1–3”
From Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? (2001) · cites this paper as [3]
Cites
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 · see citing works
Argonauts of the Western Pacific
Malinowski, B. (2002) · doi:10.4324/9780203421260 · Cited by 2,160 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007) · International Journal for Quality in Health Care · doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzm042 · Cited by 42,509 · see citing works
Intercoder Reliability in Qualitative Research: Debates and Practical Guidelines
O’Connor, C., & Joffe, H. (2020) · International Journal of Qualitative Methods · doi:10.1177/1609406919899220 · Cited by 3,871 · see citing works
“Qualitative researchers have proposed alternative quality criteria that substitute the typical standards used in evaluating quantitative research (Bauer et al., 2000; Popay et al., 1998; Seale & Silverman, 1997; Yardley, 2000).”
BackgroundChecklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog?
Barbour, R. S. (2001) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115 · Cited by 2,613 · see citing works
Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions
Rychetnik, L., Frommer, M., Hawe, P., & Shiell, A. (2002) · Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health · doi:10.1136/jech.56.2.119 · Cited by 1,042 · see citing works
The problem of appraising qualitative research
Dixon-Woods, M. (2004) · Quality and Safety in Health Care · doi:10.1136/qshc.2003.008714 · Cited by 653 · see citing works
Finlay, J., Franke, T., McKay, H., & Sims-Gould, J. (2015) · Health & Place · doi:10.1016/j.healthplace.2015.05.001 · Cited by 507 · see citing works
Conducting in-depth interviews with and without voice recorders: a comparative analysis
Rutakumwa, R., Mugisha, J. O., Bernays, S., Kabunga, E., Tumwekwase, G., Mbonye, M., & Seeley, J. (2020) · Qualitative Research · doi:10.1177/1468794119884806 · Cited by 378 · see citing works
What do women want? Women's experiences of infertility treatment
Malin, M., Hemminki, E., Räikkönen, O., Sihvo, S., & Perälä, M.-L. (2001) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(00)00317-8 · Cited by 135 · see citing works
The newfound credibility of qualitative research? tales of technical essentialism and co-option
Barbour, R. S. (2003) · Qualitative Health Research · doi:10.1177/1049732303253331 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
Internet-Based Self-Management Offers an Opportunity To Achieve Better Asthma Control in Adolescents
van der Meer, V., van Stel, H. F., Detmar, S. B., Otten, W., Sterk, P. J., & Sont, J. K. (2007) · Chest · doi:10.1378/chest.06-2787 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
South, J., Bagnall, A.-M., Hulme, C., Woodall, J., Longo, R., Dixey, R., Kinsella, K., Raine, G., Vinall-Collier, K., & Wright, J. (2014) · Health Services and Delivery Research · doi:10.3310/hsdr02350 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Schults, J. A., Calleja, P., Slaughter, E., Paterson, R., Rickard, C. M., Booker, C., Marsh, N., Fenn, M., Kelly, J., Snelling, P. J., et al. (2022) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0269788 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Klein, P., Lawn, S., Tsourtos, G., & van Agteren, J. (2019) · JMIR Human Factors · doi:10.2196/14023 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Han, B., Nawaz, S., Buchanan, G., & McKay, D. (2025) · International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education · doi:10.1007/s40593-024-00456-4 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Exploring the privacy concerns of smartphone app users: a qualitative approach
Maseeh, H. I., Nahar, S., Jebarajakirthy, C., Ross, M., Arli, D., Das, M., Rehman, M., & Ashraf, H. A. (2023) · Marketing Intelligence & Planning · doi:10.1108/mip-11-2022-0515 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
South, J., Woodall, J., Kinsella, K., & Bagnall, A.-M. (2016) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1753-3 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Amadasun, S., & Omorogiuwa, T. B. E. (2020) · Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences · doi:10.1108/jhass-12-2019-0082 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
“Reliability and authenticity are important in qualitative research, and strategies such as recording data objectively and comprehensively, a count of events and the use of audio tapes assist in ensuring rigor and validity (Seale and Silverman, 1997).”
BackgroundMental health service acceptability for the armed forces veteran community
Farrand, P., Jeffs, A., Bloomfield, T., Greenberg, N., Watkins, E., & Mullan, E. (2018) · Occupational Medicine · doi:10.1093/occmed/kqy086 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
- Authors
- Seale, C.
- Affiliations
- Goldsmiths University of London (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Seale, C
- Venue
- The European Journal of Public Health
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1997-12-01
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 379-384
- ISSN
- 1101-1262 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-360X
- OpenAlex
- W2112675735
- Cited by
- 583
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 54 · 2015: 41 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 24
- FWCI
- 34.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- European Journal of Public Health (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
- Keywords
- reliability statistics, validity, coding scheme, computer-assisted coding, deviant cases, conversation analysis, transcription
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
