A Comprehensive Guide on Ensuring Quality in Qualitative Research

This essay delves into the concept of qualitative research, addressing common criticisms regarding its validity, reliability, and generalizability. It emphasizes the unique nature of qualitative methodology and the quality concerns it raises. The paper discusses key principles for ensuring quality, including sensitivity to context, rigor, transparency, commitment, coherence, impact, and the importance of the research. It highlights the role of the researcher in ensuring context awareness, empathic neutrality, and reflexivity. The essay also touches on the feasibility of qualitative research and its potential to bring positive change to communities. It concludes by asserting that while qualitative research has drawn criticism, it remains a valuable method for gaining deeper insights into social phenomena, provided that researchers implement appropriate quality enhancement measures.

Running Head: HOW TO ENSURE QUALITY IN QUALITATIVE APPROACH 1
How to ensure Quality in Qualitative Approach
Name
Institution
Course
Date

HOW TO ENSURE QUALITY IN QUALITATIVE APROACH 2
How to ensure Quality in Qualitative Approach
Teherani, Martimianakis, Stenfors-Hayes, Wadhwa & Varpio (2015) describe qualitative
research as a method where the researcher systematically investigates a social phenomenon
under its natural settings. The quantitative method of study is probably the most common method
where the main aim is to find out the number of people who undertake a particular behaviour.
The qualitative approach is an extension to this, and as Sutton & Austin (2015) points, the
researcher accesses the thoughts of individuals enabling them to understand why people
undertake a particular behaviour. Therefore, qualitative studies allow a deeper understanding of a
specific social occurrence by acquiring personal insights, perceptions from participants as
compared to quantitative studies which seek to find out the magnitude of the phenomenon.
(Patton, 2015) In qualitative studies, the focus is on intangible aspects of a particular issue such
as beliefs and opinions. However, as Yardley (2016) points, this unique nature of this
methodology means that it defers various conventional rules and principles of research thereby
raising serious quality concerns. This paper will, therefore, conduct an in-depth discussion on the
qualitative research concept, assess the quality concerns prevailing and ways to solve these
concerns.
Common criticisms
While there is a common wide acceptance of qualitative research design as an appropriate
method of research particularly in the social sciences field, the approach has had its share of
criticism. A common criticism levelled against qualitative research is that it cannot be
generalised (Fitzpatrick, 2011). A key objective of every research undertaking is that broad
inferences can be drawn from the study that can then be inferred to the broader population.
However, as Leung (2015) points, generalisation usually is an unexpected attribute in qualitative

HOW TO ENSURE QUALITY IN QUALITATIVE APROACH 3
research. Generalisation is a vital quality standard that research studies should meet. For
generalisation to apply, the particular conditions in the study such as the sample population
statistics, context, and time have to be similar to the states in the broader population. However, in
qualitative research, the sharp focus is on acquiring deep contextualized understandings of
particular cases which in most cases does not represent the general population (Patton, 2015). As
Leung (2015) notes, in qualitative studies, a particular phenomenon is studied in a specific
locality or distinct ethnic group. Therefore, the findings cannot be applied to the broader public.
The lack of generalisation then raises serious questions regarding the feasibility of qualitative
research and the rationale of dedicating time and resources towards a study that cannot be
generalised. As Laws, Harper, Jones & Marcus (2013) further note, it is difficult to acquire
funding for the same as major organisations such as the UN only fund studies that allow
generalisation. Therefore, the lack of generalizability for qualitative research is a crucial issue.
Validity and reliability are essential quality thresholds for any research undertaking.
According to Leung (2015) validity entails the suitability of the various processes,
methodologies and data applied to the research while reliability is about the consistency of the
results and their replicability. The drawback with qualitative research is that there are no
common universal criteria for assessing the validity and reliability of a study. In quantitative
studies, there are established standards for testing the validity and reliability of research.
However, for qualitative research designs, validity and reliability are determined by the
precautions applied by the researcher to guarantee the two quality aspects. For example, in an
element such as sampling, in quantitative research, there is a guiding criterion on what sample
size and features would be appropriate for a particular population. This is not the case for
qualitative research with the method heavily relying on the researcher’s ability to identify the

HOW TO ENSURE QUALITY IN QUALITATIVE APROACH 4
sampling technique suitable for the analysis on the basis of its aims and context (Sutton &
Austin, 2015). The ambiguity surrounding the determination of reliability and validity in
qualitative research, therefore, raise serious concerns regarding the appropriateness of the
method.
Key principles for ensuring quality in qualitative research
As earlier denoted, due to lack of a universal structure, enhancing quality in qualitative
research is wholly dependent on the quality measures placed by the researchers. Yardley (2016)
outlines three vital principles that qualitative researchers can utilise to guarantee quality findings
in their study. Sensitivity to context is the first principle. This principle is built on the
appreciation that study issues and contexts differ from time to time and Yardley (2016) urges
researchers to have an extra awareness regarding the contexts of their study. The first context
awareness for any researcher should be on existing theory. Researchers should extensively
identify relevant literature on similar topics and most importantly, rationally interpret the data.
The empirical evidence from existing literature is essential regarding giving the study an
extensive grounding from where concepts and arguments can be highlighted and queried. The
second type of context entails socio-cultural contexts. Qualitative research is based on opinions,
beliefs and insights which largely depend on the communication between the researcher and
participants. Communication is a delicate issue with aspects such the researcher’s behaviour and
characteristics having a profound effect on the effectiveness of communication between them
and the participants (Fortune, Reid & Miller, 2013). Therefore, it becomes necessary for the
researcher to take into account the prevailing socio-cultural context in their research settings and
consider how their characteristics affect their engagement with participants. The researcher can

HOW TO ENSURE QUALITY IN QUALITATIVE APROACH 5
then tailor their behaviours and characteristics to fit into these contexts thus positively
influencing the participants’ involvement. This will then guarantee quality data collection.
Yardley (2016)’s second principle encompasses the aspects of rigour, transparency,
commitment, and coherence. This is in regards to the processes of data collection, analysis and
reporting for any research undertakings. Rigour entails ensuring that data collection and analysis
is comprehensive and complete. Yardley (2016) proposes triangulation method as a way of
collecting data that is exhaustive and all rounded. Transparency entails the disclosure of all
aspects relevant to the research. Providing various details of the study such as data collection and
analysis methods and how multiple factors in these processes affected the research is crucial to
allow the audience to discern various patterns of the findings (Patton, 2015). Commitment refers
to the researcher’s overall engagement to the study. Yardley (2016) places a responsibility on the
researcher to ensure that they acquire the necessary skills and competence in the methodology
while also ensuring that they adequately immerse themselves in the research’s relevant data.
Coherence encompasses a link between the research question, methodology and the findings in
the collective study narrative. An interaction between the four aspects will lead to the production
of credible research with relevant results.
The third principle is the impact and importance of the research. Yardley (2016) argues
that the most important criterion for judging any research is on its impact and utility. A
research’s ultimate value is determined by whether its objectives are met and most importantly
its applicability and relevance to the community in context. With qualitative analyses focusing
on specific localities, it is only vital that any research undertakings create a practical solution to a
current local problem. This would contribute to making qualitative study undertakings feasible.
The role of the researcher

HOW TO ENSURE QUALITY IN QUALITATIVE APROACH 6
The qualitative research’s principles assist in understanding the researcher’s role in this
type of study. Ensuring context awareness is an essential role for the researcher. The researcher
has to understand the research topic’s academic context to ensure the appropriate collection of
empirical evidence on the same. My colleagues at the agency believe that qualitative research
lacks rigour. However, by providing a proper empirical evidence background to the qualitative
insights in the study makes it both informative and comprehensive. Additionally, the researcher
should identify the socio-cultural context of the research, and as Tonon (2015) advises, they
should define how the setting affects their study. With this awareness, the researcher should then
modify the study characteristics to fit into the relevant socio-cultural context. Also, through the
understanding of context the researcher can easily ensure empathic neutrality. Prior (2017)
defines empathic neutrality as a show of sensitivity and mindfulness as the researcher works with
the participants. It is worth noting that the mindfulness concept is both an ethical and quality
concern where the researcher’s judgements and inner perceptions can affect the inferences they
make in their analysis. Therefore, through context awareness researchers can fit their
investigative analysis to the appropriate academic and sociocultural context, a crucial
prerequisite for reliability.
Critical reservations by the individuals at the agency are that qualitative research lacks
reliability and credibility. As earlier mentioned, with no clear quality assessment criteria, quality
assurance in qualitative studies is determined by the researcher’s competence and the quality
enhancement measures they put in place. This highlight’s the researcher’s commitment role
where they should ensure that they acquire the necessary skills required for the adopted approach
(Yardley, 2016). I recommend that the agency embark on a capacity building programme that
equips the staff with adequate qualitative methodology skills for example proper interviewing

HOW TO ENSURE QUALITY IN QUALITATIVE APROACH 7
skills. In this way, their perceptions will change regarding the validity and credibility of the
strategy. Commitment also extends to the researcher’s immersion in the study which enables
them to probe deeper for information thus providing in-depth analysis.
Reflexivity is also an essential role of the researcher. It entails the detailed disclosure of
all the research’s aspects that are deemed relevant (Medico & Santiago-Delefosse, 2014).
Through reflexivity, the researcher describes their whole research journey to their audience
outlining the critical decisions they made and their rationale. Judging by how a researcher
arrived at a particular inference, the reader can easily discern the validity of a study. Another
significant researcher’s role is to ensure that research is feasible (Locke, Spirduso & Silverman,
2014). Feasibility, in this case, regards the impact of the study on its settings. Research is
deemed feasible if it can help bring positive change to the community. Therefore, by adopting
qualitative research methods, the CERT can build on its objective of ensuring a long-term
positive change in the community it serves.
In conclusion, we can say that qualitative research method provides an appropriate way
of acquiring deeper insight regarding a particular social phenomenon. However, due to its nature,
the technique has drawn lots of criticism regarding its validity, reliability, and lack of
generalizability. A look at the methodology’s principles demonstrates ways as to how credibility
and validity can be enhanced. Most importantly is the appreciation that most conventional rules
of research are not applicable to this type of methodology and despite its ambiguity, the method
still is of great benefit to the society and the research field.

HOW TO ENSURE QUALITY IN QUALITATIVE APROACH 8
References
Fortune, A., Reid, W., & Miller, R. (2013). Qualitative Research in Social Work. Columbia
University Press.
Fitzpatrick, J. (2011). Encyclopedia of Nursing Research (3rd Ed.). Springer.
Laws, S., Harper, C., Jones, N., & Marcus, R. (2013). Research for development. London: SAGE
Publications Ltd.
Leung, L. (2015). Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research. Journal of
Family Medicine and Primary Care, 4(3), 324. doi: 10.4103/2249-4863.161306
Locke, L., Spirduso, W., & Silverman, S. (2014). Proposals That Work. Sage.
Medico, D., & Santiago-Delefosse, M. (2014). From Reflexivity to Resonances: Accounting for
Interpretation Phenomena in Qualitative Research. Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 11(4), 350-364. doi: 10.1080/14780887.2014.915367
Patton, M. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Prior, M. (2017). Accomplishing “rapport” in qualitative research interviews: Empathic moments
in interaction. Applied Linguistics Review, 0(0).
Sutton, J., & Austin, Z. (2015). Qualitative Research: Data Collection, Analysis, and
Management. The Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, 68(3). doi:
10.4212/cjhp.v68i3.1456
Tonon, G. (2015). Qualitative Studies in Quality of Life. Springer.
Teherani, A., Martimianakis, T., Stenfors-Hayes, T., Wadhwa, A., & Varpio, L. (2015).
Choosing a Qualitative Research Approach. Journal of Graduate Medical
Education, 7(4), 669-670. doi: 10.4300/jgme-d-15-00414.1
Yardley, L. (2016). Demonstrating the validity of qualitative research. The Journal of Positive
Psychology, 12(3), 295-296. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2016.1262624