The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Goodness of Qualitative Research
Abstract
Research that is not theory d driven, hypothesis testing, or generalization producing may be dismissed as deficient or worse. This narrow conception does an injustice to the variety of contributions that qualitative research can make. In this article I draw upon studies conducted by means of qualitative research methods in order to demonstrate the breadth of desirable outcomes.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017) · Aldine (Routledge reprint) · doi:10.4324/9780203793206 · Cited by 25,789
Cited by
Rigour and grounded theory research
Chiovitti, R. F., & Piran, N. (2003) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1046/j.0309-2402.2003.02822.x · Cited by 523
“I teach students, not subjects”: Teacher‐student relationships as contexts for secondary literacy
Moje, E. B. (1996) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.1598/rrq.31.2.4 · Cited by 157
Day, C. W. (1995) · British Educational Research Journal · doi:10.1080/0141192950210308 · Cited by 41
Enhancing access to experiential learning in a science and technology degree programme
Coll, R. K., Lay, M. C., & Zegwaard, K. E. (2002) · Journal of Vocational Education & Training · doi:10.1080/13636820200200195 · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Authors
- Peshkin, A.
- Venue
- Educational Researcher
- Published
- 1993-03
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 23
- ISSN
- 0013-189X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2148754000
- Cited by
- 447
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 70.03
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Goodness of Qualitative Research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1176170
- The paper
- Peshkin, A. (1993). The Goodness of Qualitative Research. Educational Researcher. https://doi.org/10.2307/1176170
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.
