Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 336

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Triangulation of Qualitative Methods: Heideggerian Hermeneutics and Grounded Theory

Wilson, Holly Skodol, Hutchinson, Sally A.·1991·Qualitative Health Research

Abstract

This article proposes the use of two qualitative research methodologies-Heideggerian hermeneutics and grounded theory-as a way to understand complex human phenomena. The hermeneutic method uses "thick description," "paradigm cases," "exemplars," and "the-matic analysis" to discover meanings and ways of being (practices) in lived experiences. The aim of grounded theory methodology is to generate an analytic schema called "a substantive grounded theory' that conceptually explains basic social processes at a higher level of abstraction. While each has its own integrity and yields different outcomes, triangulation of these two qualitative methods in one study can illuminate clinical realities that elude alternative approaches. Hermeneutics reveals the uniqueness of shared meanings and common practices that can inform the way we think about our practice; grounded theory provides a conceptual framework useful for planning interventions and further quantitative research.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/104973239100100206

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Wilson, H. S., & Hutchinson, S. A.
Venue
Qualitative Health Research
Published
1991-05
Volume
1
Issue
2
Pages
263-276
ISSN
  • 1049-7323 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-7557
OpenAlex
W2114738292
Cited by
336
References
1
FWCI
2.32
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

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.