Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 732

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Studying actions in context: a qualitative shadowing method for organizational research

Open access
McDonald, Seonaidh·2005·Qualitative Research

Abstract

Shadowing is a qualitative research technique that has seldom been used and rarely been discussed critically in the social science literature. This article has pulled together all of the studies using shadowing as a research method and through reviewing these studies has developed a threefold classification of different modes of shadowing. This work provides a basis for a qualitative shadowing method to be defined, and its potential for a distinctive contribution to organizational research to be discussed, for the first time.

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 · 10.1177/1468794105056923

Cites

27 of 27 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

Cites

Show all 27 references

Metadata

Authors
McDonald, S.
Venue
Qualitative Research
Published
2005-11
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
455-473
ISSN
  • 1468-7941 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-3109
OpenAlex
W2063502596
Cited by
732
References
27
FWCI
14.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Studying actions in context: a qualitative shadowing method for organizational research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1468794105056923
The paper
McDonald, S. (2005). Studying actions in context: a qualitative shadowing method for organizational research. Qualitative Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794105056923

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.