Indian Institute of Public Health, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India.
Indian J Public Health. 2012 Jan-Mar;56(1):4-11. doi: 10.4103/0019-557X.96949.
Traditionally, qualitative studies are founded on interpretative and constructive epistemology. The process of data collection in these studies is longer and intensive. This helps to build a strong rapport with the community, hence enabling to capture the field as naturally as possible. These characteristics provide an ample scope to take care of quality and validity of data. However, in applied situations, data collection is often a truncated activity. This robs away a number of taken-for-granted strengths of traditional qualitative research methods: No time is spent on rapport building; holism is left behind, instead we engage in selection; we focus narrowly on specific phenomenon of concern, divorced from its context; analysis does not evolve out of an iterative process. In this paper, we aim to discuss some of the issues related to rigor and quality of such studies and strategies available to address them.
传统上，定性研究基于解释主义和建构主义认识论。这些研究中的数据收集过程更长、更密集。这有助于与社区建立牢固的关系，从而能够尽可能自然地捕捉现场。这些特点为数据的质量和有效性提供了充分的保障。然而，在实际应用中，数据收集往往是一项被截断的活动。这剥夺了传统定性研究方法的许多不言而喻的优势：没有时间建立融洽关系；整体性被抛在一边，取而代之的是选择；我们狭隘地关注关注的特定现象，而不关注其背景；分析不是从迭代过程中发展而来的。在本文中，我们旨在讨论与这类研究的严谨性和质量相关的一些问题，以及解决这些问题的策略。
