Contributions of qualitative research to the validity of intervention research

The Interdisciplinary Qualitative Research Subcommittee (IQRS) of the Task for on Evidence-based Interventions in School Psychology assumed the responsibility of developing criteria for reviewing qualitative methods used in intervention research. The IQRS, composed primarily of psychologists and anthropologists, was confronted with the long-standing debate between qualitative and quantitative researchers and with the task of explicating the potential contributions of qualitative research to establishing an evidence base for interventions in school psychology. Consequently, the outcomes of the subcommittee's work included not only a set of criteria for evaluating qualitative research but also a clearer understanding of the added value of mixed qualitative-quantitative approaches to intervention research. The purposes of this article are to provide an overview of qualitative research, present the criteria set forth by the IQRS, discuss the role of qualitative research in establishing the foundation for evidence-based practice, and introduce the illustrative research articles of the special issue. The four studies highlighted in this issue represent applications of qualitative research that meet the IQRS criteria and demonstrate the potential of qualitative research, conducted within a mixed-method framework, for enhancing our understanding of school-based interventions.     

Grounded Theory in Genetic Counseling Research: An Interpretive Perspective

As qualitative inquiry has gained wider acceptance in genetic counseling research, it has become increasingly important for researchers and those who evaluate their work to recognize the diversity of methods that fall under this broad umbrella. Some of these methods adhere to the traditional conventions of scientific research (e.g., objectivity, reliability, validity, replicability, causality and generalizability). When such studies are evaluated by reviewers who are well versed in scientific methods, the rigor of the study may be readily apparent. However, when researchers are using methods that do not conform to traditional scientific conventions, the distinction between well conducted and poorly conducted studies may become more difficult to discern. This article focuses on grounded theory because it is a widely used qualitative method. We highlight key components of this method in order to contrast conventions that fall within a scientific paradigm to those that fall within an interpretivist paradigm. The intent is to illustrate how the conventions within these two different paradigms yield different types of knowledge claims—both of which can advance genetic counseling theory and practice.     

A Critical Methodological Review of Discourse and Conversation Analysis Studies of Family Therapy

Discourse (DA) and conversation (CA) analysis, two qualitative research methods, have been recently suggested as potentially promising for the study of family therapy due to common epistemological adherences and their potential for an in situ study of therapeutic dialog. However, to date, there is no systematic methodological review of the few existing DA and CA studies of family therapy. This study aims at addressing this lack by critically reviewing published DA and CA studies of family therapy on methodological grounds. Twenty‐eight articles in total are reviewed in relation to certain methodological axes identified in the relevant literature. These include choice of method, framing of research question(s), data/sampling, type of analysis, epistemological perspective, content/type of knowledge claims, and attendance to criteria for good quality practice. It is argued that the reviewed studies show “glimpses” of the methods’ potential for family therapy research despite the identification of certain “shortcomings” regarding their methodological rigor. These include unclearly framed research questions and the predominance of case study designs. They also include inconsistencies between choice of method, stated or unstated epistemological orientations and knowledge claims, and limited attendance to criteria for good quality practice. In conclusion, it is argued that DA and CA can add to the existing quantitative and qualitative methods for family therapy research. They can both offer unique ways for a detailed study of the actual therapeutic dialog, provided that future attempts strive for a methodologically rigorous practice and against their uncritical deployment.     

Science, ethnicity, and bias: where have we gone wrong?

The quality, quantity, and funding of ethnic minority research have been inadequate. One factor that has contributed to this inadequacy is the practice of scientific psychology. Although principles of psychological science involve internal and external validity, in practice psychology emphasizes internal validity in research studies. Because many psychological principles and measures have not been cross-validated with different populations, those conducting ethnic minority research often have a more difficult time demonstrating rigorous internal validity. Thus, psychology's overemphasis of internal as opposed to external validity has differentially hindered the development of ethnic minority research. To develop stronger research knowledge on ethnic minority groups, it is important that (a) all research studies address external validity issues and explicitly specify the populations to which the findings are applicable; (b) different research approaches, including the use of qualitative and ethnographic methods, be appreciated; and (c) the psychological meaning of ethnicity or race be examined in ethnic comparisons.     

Grounded Theory methods in child psychotherapy research

This article considers the place of qualitative research in psychoanalysis and child psychotherapy. It discusses why research methodology for many years occupied so small a place in these fields, and examines the cultural and social developments since the 1960s which have changed this situation, giving formal but also qualitative methods of research much greater significance. It reflects on the different pressures to develop explicit research methods which arise both from outside the psychoanalytic field, as a condition of its continued professional survival, and from within it, where its main aim is the development of fundamental psychoanalytic knowledge. It suggests that the conduct of mainly quantitative research into treatment outcomes is largely a response to these external pressures, whilst the main benefits to be gained from the development of qualitative research methods, such as Grounded Theory, are in facilitating the knowledge-generating capacities and achievements of child psychotherapists themselves. The paper describes Grounded Theory methods, and explains how they can be valuable in the recognition of hitherto unrecognised meanings and patterns as these are made visible in clinical practice. Finally, it briefly describes three examples of completed doctoral studies, all of which have added significantly to the knowledge-base of child psychotherapy, and which demonstrate how much can be accomplished using this method of research.     

Guidance on conducting and reviewing systematic reviews (and meta-analyses) in work and organizational psychology

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are means of summarizing and synthesizing research evidence in a given topic area. They can be used to define the current state of knowledge and how confident we can be in that knowledge, to identify evidence gaps, and to provide recommendations for policy and practice based on the best available evidence. At European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, our editorial stance is explicitly to encourage the conduct of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The purpose of this editorial is to provide some guidance to authors and journal referees on the (technical) features of good systematic reviews.     

Recognizing Racit Knowledge in Medical Epistemology

The evidence-based medicine movement advocates basing all medical decisions on certain types of quantitative research data and has stimulated protracted controversy and debate since its inception. Evidence-based medicine presupposes an inaccurate and deficient view of medical knowledge. Michael Polanyi’s theory of tacit knowledge both explains this deficiency and suggests remedies for it. Polanyi shows how all explicit human knowledge depends on a wealth of tacit knowledge which accrues from experience and is essential for problem solving. Edmund Pellegrino’s classic treatment of clinical judgment is examined, and a Polanyian critique of this position demonstrates that tacit knowledge is necessary for understanding how clinical judgment and medical decisions involve persons. An adequate medical epistemology requires much more qualitative research relevant to the clinical encounter and medical decision making than is currently being done. This research is necessary for preventing an uncritical application of evidence-based medicine by health care managers that erodes good clinical practice. Polanyi’s epistemology shows the need for this work and provides the structural core for building an adequate and robust medical epistemology that moves beyond evidence-based medicine.An erratum to this article can be found at     

Theoretically informed qualitative psychotherapy research: A primer

This paper presents an introduction to theoretically informed qualitative psychotherapy research (QPR). Although QPR researchers have traditionally remained silent on theory, we suggest this has resulted in an implicit and unacknowledged use of theory. We argue instead for a clear articulation of qualitative researchers' theory and outline how theory can be incorporated to inform the entire qualitative research process. This approach assumes the research problem is embedded in a clearly defined and articulated theoretical framework, which also informs data collection and data analysis. We outline how researchers can use explicit theoretical frameworks to inform research question formulation, data collection and data analysis and illustrate this with specific applications of the method in practice. We believe that starting from a declared theoretical framework sets up a dialogue between the research problem, the type of data required and their meaningful analysis and interpretation. This aims not only to achieve greater depth in the final product of research, but also to enhance its utility in terms of practice; it contributes to building, altering and differentiating theory; and it allows for greater transparency by openly articulating the theoretical framework that scaffolds the entirety of the research process.     

The Evidence Base for Occupational Therapy in Mental Health: More Systematic Reviews Are Needed

To shape its work, the Research Centre for Occupation & Mental Health is interested in research priorities. Systematic reviews develop an overview of the research available about an intervention, which can provide evidence to underpin practice. They also however, identify gaps in the knowledge base and so are useful for research-prioritization exercises. A rigorous literature search identified only four systematic reviews about occupational therapy in mental health, which suggests that more are needed to underpin practice. This article also explains a six-stage process for conducting a systematic review that can be used by occupational therapists in mental health.     

Educational psychology and the effectiveness of inclusive education/mainstreaming

Background. Inclusive education/mainstreaming is a key policy objective for the education of children and young people with special educational needs (SEN) and disabilities. Aims. This paper reviews the literature on the effectiveness of inclusive education/mainstreaming. The focus is on evidence for effects in terms of child outcomes with examination also of evidence on processes that support effectiveness. Samples. The review covers a range of SEN and children from pre‐school to the end of compulsory education. Method. Following an historical review of evidence on inclusive education/mainstreaming, the core of the paper is a detailed examination of all the papers published in eight journals from the field of special education published 2001‐2005 (N=1373): Journal of Special Education, Exceptional Children, Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, Journal of Learning Disabilities, Remedial and Special Education, British Journal of Special Education, European Journal of Special Needs Education, and the International Journal of Inclusive Education. The derived categories were: comparative studies of outcomes: other outcome studies; non‐comparative qualitative studies including non‐experimental case studies; teacher practice and development; teacher attitudes; and the use of teaching assistants. Results. Only 14 papers (1.0%) were identified as comparative outcome studies of children with some form of SEN. Measures used varied but included social as well as educational outcomes. Other papers included qualitative studies of inclusive practice, some of which used a non‐comparative case study design while others were based on respondent's judgements, or explored process factors including teacher attitudes and the use of teaching assistants. Conclusions. Inclusive education/mainstreaming has been promoted on two bases: the rights of children to be included in mainstream education and the proposition that inclusive education is more effective. This review focuses on the latter issue. The evidence from this review does not provide a clear endorsement for the positive effects of inclusion. There is a lack of evidence from appropriate studies and, where evidence does exist, the balance was only marginally positive. It is argued that the policy has been driven by a concern for children's rights. The important task now is to research more thoroughly the mediators and moderators that support the optimal education for children with SEN and disabilities and, as a consequence, develop an evidence‐based approach to these children's education.     

质性研究中的资料饱和及其判定

在质性研究中, 资料饱和通常被用以评估研究资料的充足性。但在研究实践中, 资料饱和却存在概念模糊及操作性问题。作为某项质性研究所抽取的样本量已满足研究需要的标志, 按照在研究过程中判定时点的先后顺序, 资料饱和可划分为数据饱和、编码或主题饱和、意义饱和及理论饱和4种主要形式。4种形式的资料饱和各有其特定的内涵、评估方式和判定标准。研究认为, 达到资料饱和的样本量标准不应统一设定, 其检验需嵌入具体的研究过程; 资料饱和存在逻辑上的不确定性, 适度追加抽样有助于进一步确认; 资料饱和作为考察研究质量的一项重要指标, 并不适用于所有质性研究。     

Qualitative Health Research and the IRB: Answering the “So What?” with Qualitative Inquiry

Qualitative inquiry is increasingly used to foster change in health policy and practice. Research ethics committees often misunderstand qualitative inquiry, assuming its design can be judged by criteria of quantitative science. Traditional health research uses scientific realist standards as a means-to-an-end, answering the question “So what?” to support the advancement of practice and policy. In contrast, qualitative inquiry often draws on constructivist paradigms, generating knowledge either as an end-in-itself or as a means to foster change. When reviewers inappropriately judge qualitative inquiry, it restricts the ways health phenomena can be understood. Qualitative inquiry is necessary because it enables an understanding not possible within scientific explanation. When such research illuminates, it can also shed light onto the “So what?” In order to ensure an appraisal of qualitative inquiry congruent with its paradigmatic premises, we suggest the “Illumination Test,” met when findings foster rich understanding of phenomena, resulting in a reflective “aha!”     

Applying evidence to support ethical decisions: Is the placebo really powerless?

Using placebos in day-to-day practice is an ethical problem. This paper summarises the available epidemiological evidence to support this difficult decision. Based on these data we propose to differentiate between placebo and “knowledge framing”. While the use of placebo should be confined to experimental settings in clinical trials, knowledge framing — which is only conceptually different from placebo — is a desired, expected and necessary component of any doctor-patient encounter. Examples from daily practice demonstrate both, the need to investigate the effects of knowledge framing and its impact on ethical, medical, economical and legal decisions. An earlier version of this paper was presented at an international conference, “Placebo: Its Action and Place in Health Research Today,” held in Warsaw, Poland on 12–13 April, 2003.     

Evidence-based practice: A challenge for European developmental psychology

In recent years the evidence-based practice movement has been seeing great gains in impact. Standards for research leading to evidence-based practice have been defined. So far, however, in the area of education standards of evidence are not extensively implemented and in most federal European policies an evidence-based reform has not been attained. The present paper advocates investing effort in evidence-based practice. In particular, the paper invites European developmental psychology and its representatives to transfer their knowledge and contribute to evidence-based practice which, in turn, will foster positive child and youth development. Incipiently, the paper discusses the new challenges facing universities and European scientific societies as contexts for scientific disciplines and their perspectives. Then, current directions in developmental psychology are described. The central section of the paper focuses on standards of evidence and the use of research for evidence-based practice and policy. It highlights the challenge facing European developmental psychology concerning active contribution to evidence-based practice. Two empirical examples are presented: (1) illustrating that kindergarten and school are the places where evidence-based practice preventions and interventions should take place; and (2) describing various steps of the transfer of basic research to evidence-based practice. Finally, the contribution that the European Society for Developmental Psychology can make to support the transfer of knowledge to evidence-based practice is outlined.     

‘The essay method’ a qualitative method for studying therapeutic dialogues

ABSTRACT

This paper presents a qualitative research method for analysing therapeutic dialogues called ‘the essay method’. A central part of the method uses the format of the literary essay as a model. The method consists of a close monitoring of clinical material guided by an overall psychoanalytic/psychodynamic theoretical frame. It combines both clinical details and global patterns of clinical material and is especially fitted for studying relational qualities of psychotherapeutic dialogues. In this paper, the background for qualitative analysis in studying psychoanalytic material is discussed, and the procedures for using the method are demonstrated. A study of therapeutic competence in a group of student therapists is used as an example of the method in practice, demonstrating that the essay method may have potential for revising theory and establishing new concepts based on empirical findings. The essay method is compared with other qualitative methods, and it is argued that it is suitable for psychoanalytic research.     

Complementary and alternative therapies for cerebral palsy

The optimal practice of medicine includes integrating individual clinical expertise with the best available clinical evidence from systematic research. This article reviews nine treatment modalities used for children who have cerebral palsy (CP), including hyperbaric oxygen, the Adeli Suit, patterning, electrical stimulation, conductive education, equine-assisted therapy, craniosacral therapy, Feldenkrais therapy, and acupuncture. Unfortunately, these modalities have different degrees of published evidence to support or refute their effectiveness. Uncontrolled and controlled trials of hippotherapy have shown beneficial effects on body structures and functioning. Studies of acupuncture are promising, but more studies are required before specific recommendations can be made. Most studies of patterning have been negative and its use cannot be recommended. However, for the other interventions, such as hyperbaric oxygen, more evidence is required before recommendations can be made. The individual with CP and his or her family have a right to full disclosure of all possible treatment options and whatever knowledge currently is available regarding these therapies.     

Reflexivity in quantitative research: A rationale and beginner's guide

Reflexivity is the act of examining one's own assumption, belief, and judgement systems, and thinking carefully and critically about how these influence the research process. The practice of reflexivity confronts and questions who we are as researchers and how this guides our work. It is central in debates on objectivity, subjectivity, and the very foundations of social science research and generated knowledge. Incorporating reflexivity in the research process is traditionally recognized as one of the most notable differences between qualitative and quantitative methodologies. Qualitative research centres and celebrates the participants' personal and unique lived experience. Therefore, qualitative researchers are readily encouraged to consider how their own unique positionalities inform the research process and this forms an important part of training within this paradigm. Quantitative methodologies in social and personality psychology, and more generally, on the other hand, have remained seemingly detached from this level of reflexivity and general reflective practice. In this commentary, we, three quantitative researchers who have grappled with the compatibility of reflexivity within our own research, argue that reflexivity has much to offer quantitative methodologists. The act of reflexivity prompts researchers to acknowledge and centre their own positionalities, encourages a more thoughtful engagement with every step of the research process, and thus, as we argue, contributes to the ongoing reappraisal of openness and transparency in psychology. In this paper, we make the case for integrating reflexivity across all research approaches, before providing a ‘beginner's guide’ for quantitative researchers wishing to engage reflexively with their own work, providing concrete recommendations, worked examples, and reflexive prompts.     

Decision resource consultancy: a convergence of disciplines that aid consumer marketing

When companies recognise the limitations of seat‐of‐pants decision making, it is not always immediately clear where to turn in order to procure the information and advice that can result in better business decisions. The chosen resource might be a research agency (assumed to be fast‐acting); a management consultancy (likely to be reassuringly expensive); or sources in the academic world (popularly seen as ‘leading‐edge’). What is delivered will depend on the type of supplier chosen: so far, each of these resources has developed in isolation, with its own assumptions, methods and codes of conduct. Nowhere is this more starkly seen than among providers of qualitative research, the discipline that gave birth to focus groups and marketing‐oriented depth interviews. Depending on the supplier, the client may be provided with research that is process‐based, skills‐based or knowledge‐based. The design, practice and analysis of the research will differ accordingly. In this paper, it is argued that the time has come to establish a new form of business consultancy which understands the strengths and weaknesses of these three traditional approaches, which can offer research brokerage that makes available the most appropriate techniques, and which can bring together the distinctive offerings of market‐research agencies, universities and management consultancies as a total resource in helping clients to make optimal decisions. An acceptance of new kinds of professional alliances will be required, as ‘meta‐consultants’ look for cooperation, not competition, among those who are based in each of these three domains. Copyright © 2002 Henry Stewart Publications.