The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Qualitative research and psychological theorizing
Abstract
Unlike other disciplines in the human sciences, psychology has undervalued the role of qualitative research methods in scientific inquiry. This has done a disservice to psychology, depriving its practitioners of skills which can simultaneously liberate and discipline the theoretical imagination. ‘Grounded theory’ is one useful approach to the systematic generation of theory from qualitative data, and alternative criteria can be advanced for judging the adequacy of research where qualitative methods have been used. An advantage of qualitative research is that theory is generated which is contextually sensitive, persuasive, and relevant.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“A team of researchers (CCG, BB and HB) conducted analysis individually, and then agreed themes through discussion. Conducting analysis with researchers of different professional backgrounds increases the trustworthiness of the analysis [45].”
From Can support workers from AgeUK deliver an intervention to support older people with anxiety and depression? A qualitative evaluation (2019) · cites this paper as [45]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Guide to Conducting Consensual Qualitative Research
Hill, C. E., Thompson, B. J., & Williams, E. N. (1997) · The Counseling Psychologist · doi:10.1177/0011000097254001 · Cited by 2,884
Qualitative research methods in health technology assessment: a review of the literature.
Murphy, Dingwall, Greatbatch, Parker, & Watson (1998) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta2160 · Cited by 1,107
“95 (Hammersley, 1985; Marshall, 1985; Atwood and Hinds, 1986; Bryman, 1988; Merriam, 1988; Hammersley, 1989; Strauss and Corbin, 1990; Firestone, 1993; Henwood and Pidgeon, 1993; LeCompte and Preissle, 1993a; Miles and Huberman, 1994; Keen and Packwood, 1995).”
InfluentialBiggerstaff, D. L., & Thompson, A. (2008) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1080/14780880802314304 · Cited by 867
“Only over the last decade and a half has it become accepted by many within the health disciplines that such research aims are most appropriately explored with the use of qualitative methodologies ( Henwood, & Pidgeon, 1992 ; Smith, 1996a , 1996b ; The Psychologist, 1995 ; Turpin et al, 1997 ).”
BackgroundThe problem of appraising qualitative research
Dixon-Woods, M. (2004) · Quality and Safety in Health Care · doi:10.1136/qshc.2003.008714 · Cited by 653
Descriptive and interpretive approaches to qualitative research
Elliott, R., & Timulák, L. (2015) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/med:psych/9780198527565.003.0011 · Cited by 489
Metadata
- Authors
- Henwood, K. L., & Pidgeon, N. F.
- Affiliations
- Brunel University of London (GB)
- Birkbeck, University of London (GB)
- Venue
- British Journal of Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1992-02
- Volume
- 83
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 97-111
- ISSN
- 0007-1269 (ISSN-L)
- 2044-8295
- OpenAlex
- W2115343912
- Cited by
- 808
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 40 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 50 · 2013: 49 · 2012: 40
- FWCI
- 49.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- British Journal of Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › General Psychology › Academic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
- Keywords
- qualitative research, grounded theory, theory generation, psychological research methods
- MeSH terms
- Documentation, Humans, Psychological Theory, Research Design, Reproducibility of Results
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
