The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners
Abstract
PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS NOT THE FULL BOOK TEXT - PUBLISHER POLICY ONLY ALLOWS ACCESS TO AN EXTRACT OF THIS BOOK IN THE UWE BRISTOL RESEARCH REPOSITORY For Chapter 1: This chapter introduces qualitative research to a reader new to the area, and sets the scene for the rest of the book. It clearly specifies what defines qualitative research, and differentiates the use of a whole qualitative paradigm, or Big Q approach, with the more limited use of qualitative data within a more positivist paradigm. It contextualises qualitative research – within psychology – by providing a brief history of the approach, and by locating it within the learning-context of research degrees at many universities, where quantitative approaches tend to predominate. The chapter explores the question of what makes a good qualitative researcher by introducing the concept of a qualitative sensibility, and by outlining skills important in qualitative research, such as reflexivity, interactional ability, and a critical and inquiring mind. The chapter also introduces the authors and their perspectives on qualitative research. Finally, the chapter introduces the overall approach, organisation and structure of the book, and its specific and unique pedagogical features, including the companion website. The chapter is supported with a range of pedagogical features including annotated further reading, and chapter overviews and summaries. The companion website includes an interactive flashcard glossary of key terms for this chapter and self-test multiple choice questions for section 1: Successfully getting started in qualitative 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.
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
Cited by
Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019) · Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health · doi:10.1080/2159676x.2019.1628806 · Cited by 19,677
“We concep-tualise themes as patterns of shared meaning underpinned or united by a core concept (we later conceptualised this as a ‘ central organizing concept ’ [Braun and Clarke 2013; Braun, Clarke, and Rance 2014] to emphasise a uniting idea).”
MethodOne size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis?
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238 · Cited by 9,727
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022) · Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-69909-7_3470-2 · Cited by 5,890
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021) · Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health · doi:10.1080/2159676x.2019.1704846 · Cited by 4,776
A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis
Byrne, D. (2022) · Quality & Quantity · doi:10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y · Cited by 5,355
“Conversely, Braun and Clarke recommend synthesising and contextualising data as and when they are reported in the ‘results’ section (Braun and Clarke 2013; Terry et al.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluential
Metadata
- Venue
- QMiP Bulletin
- Publisher
- British Psychological Society
- Published
- 2016
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 21
- Pages
- 48-50
- ISSN
- 2044-0820 (ISSN-L)
- 2396-9598
- OpenAlex
- W1525564204
- Cited by
- 4,019
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1731.10
- 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: Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.53841/bpsqmip.2016.1.21.48
- The paper
- Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. (2016). QMiP Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.53841/bpsqmip.2016.1.21.48
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.