• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Paradigm shifts: exploring AI's influence on qualitative inquiry and analysis.范式转变:探索人工智能对定性研究与分析的影响
Front Res Metr Anal. 2024 Dec 5;9:1331589. doi: 10.3389/frma.2024.1331589. eCollection 2024.
2
Exploring the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Mental Healthcare: Progress, Pitfalls, and Promises.探索人工智能在精神卫生保健中的作用:进展、陷阱与前景。
Cureus. 2023 Sep 5;15(9):e44748. doi: 10.7759/cureus.44748. eCollection 2023 Sep.
3
Evaluating ChatGPT in Qualitative Thematic Analysis With Human Researchers in the Japanese Clinical Context and Its Cultural Interpretation Challenges: Comparative Qualitative Study.在日本临床背景下与人类研究人员一起在定性主题分析中评估ChatGPT及其文化解释挑战:比较定性研究
J Med Internet Res. 2025 Apr 24;27:e71521. doi: 10.2196/71521.
4
Understanding AI's Role in Endometriosis Patient Education and Evaluating Its Information and Accuracy: Systematic Review.了解人工智能在子宫内膜异位症患者教育中的作用并评估其信息及准确性:系统评价
JMIR AI. 2024 Oct 30;3:e64593. doi: 10.2196/64593.
5
The Ethics of Using Artificial Intelligence in Qualitative Research.人工智能在定性研究中的伦理问题。
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2024 Jul;19(3):92-102. doi: 10.1177/15562646241262659. Epub 2024 Jun 17.
6
Transforming Healthcare in Low-Resource Settings With Artificial Intelligence: Recent Developments and Outcomes.利用人工智能改变资源匮乏地区的医疗保健:最新进展与成果
Public Health Nurs. 2025 Mar-Apr;42(2):1017-1030. doi: 10.1111/phn.13500. Epub 2024 Dec 4.
7
Advancements and Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Pharmaceutical Sciences: A Comprehensive Review.人工智能在制药科学中的进展与应用:综述
Iran J Pharm Res. 2024 Oct 15;23(1):e150510. doi: 10.5812/ijpr-150510. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.
8
Unraveling the Ethical Enigma: Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare.解开伦理谜团:医疗保健领域的人工智能
Cureus. 2023 Aug 10;15(8):e43262. doi: 10.7759/cureus.43262. eCollection 2023 Aug.
9
A Case Study on Assessing AI Assistant Competence in Narrative Interviews.评估人工智能助手在叙事访谈中的能力的案例研究。
F1000Res. 2024 Oct 4;13:601. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.151952.2. eCollection 2024.
10
Prioritizing Trust in Podiatrists' Preference for AI in Supportive Roles Over Diagnostic Roles in Health Care: Qualitative Interview and Focus Group Study.在医疗保健中,优先考虑信任足病医生对人工智能在支持性角色而非诊断角色中的偏好:定性访谈和焦点小组研究。
JMIR Hum Factors. 2025 Feb 21;12:e59010. doi: 10.2196/59010.

引用本文的文献

1
Operator stress factors and cell contamination risks in cell processing facilities: An online survey-based analysis.细胞处理设施中的操作人员压力因素与细胞污染风险:基于在线调查的分析
Regen Ther. 2025 Apr 12;29:397-403. doi: 10.1016/j.reth.2025.03.020. eCollection 2025 Jun.

本文引用的文献

1
ChatGPT: these are not hallucinations - they're fabrications and falsifications.ChatGPT:这些不是幻觉——它们是编造和伪造。
Schizophrenia (Heidelb). 2023 Aug 19;9(1):52. doi: 10.1038/s41537-023-00379-4.
2
Developing and testing an automated qualitative assistant (AQUA) to support qualitative analysis.开发和测试一个自动定性辅助工具(AQUA)以支持定性分析。
Fam Med Community Health. 2021 Nov;9(Suppl 1). doi: 10.1136/fmch-2021-001287.
3
Augmenting Qualitative Text Analysis with Natural Language Processing: Methodological Study.利用自然语言处理增强定性文本分析:方法学研究
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Jun 29;20(6):e231. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9702.
4
Qualitative or quantitative? Developing and evaluating complex interventions: time to end the paradigm war.定性还是定量?开发和评估复杂干预措施:是时候结束范式之争了。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2013 May;50(5):583-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.09.008. Epub 2012 Nov 22.
5
Historical structure of scientific discovery.科学发现的历史结构。
Science. 1962 Jun 1;136(3518):760-4. doi: 10.1126/science.136.3518.760.

范式转变:探索人工智能对定性研究与分析的影响

Paradigm shifts: exploring AI's influence on qualitative inquiry and analysis.

作者信息

Williams Ryan Thomas

机构信息

Teesside University International Business School, TU Online, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, United Kingdom.

出版信息

Front Res Metr Anal. 2024 Dec 5;9:1331589. doi: 10.3389/frma.2024.1331589. eCollection 2024.

DOI:10.3389/frma.2024.1331589
PMID:39703400
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11656929/
Abstract

Technology has mostly been embraced in qualitative research as it has not directly conflicted with qualitative methods' paradigmatic underpinnings. However, Artificial Intelligence (AI), and in particular the process of automating the analysis of qualitative research, has the potential to be in conflict with the assumptions of interpretivism. The short article aims to explore how AI technologies, such as Natural Language Processing (NLP), have started to be used to analyze qualitative data. While this can speed up the analysis process, it has also sparked debates within the interpretive paradigm about the validity and ethics of these methods. I argue that research underpinned by the human researcher for contextual understanding and final interpretation should mostly remain with the researcher. AI might overlook the subtleties of human communication. This is because automated programmes with clear rules and formulae do not work well-under interpretivism's assumptions. Nevertheless, AI may be embraced in qualitative research in a partial automation process that enables researchers to conduct rigorous, rapid studies that more easily incorporate the many benefits of qualitative research. It is possible that AI and other technological advancements may lead to new research paradigms that better underpin the contemporary digital researcher. For example, we might see the rise of a "computational" paradigm. While AI promises to enhance efficiency and rigor in data analysis, concerns remain about its alignment with interpretivism.

摘要

在定性研究中,技术大多受到欢迎,因为它与定性方法的范式基础没有直接冲突。然而,人工智能(AI),尤其是定性研究分析自动化的过程,有可能与解释主义的假设产生冲突。这篇短文旨在探讨诸如自然语言处理(NLP)等人工智能技术是如何开始被用于分析定性数据的。虽然这可以加快分析过程,但也引发了诠释范式内关于这些方法的有效性和伦理问题的辩论。我认为,基于人类研究者进行情境理解和最终解释的研究,大多仍应由研究者来完成。人工智能可能会忽略人类交流的微妙之处。这是因为具有明确规则和公式的自动化程序在解释主义的假设下效果不佳。尽管如此,在定性研究中,可以在部分自动化过程中采用人工智能,使研究人员能够进行严谨、快速的研究,更轻松地融入定性研究的诸多益处。人工智能和其他技术进步有可能导致新的研究范式,更好地支撑当代数字研究者。例如,我们可能会看到“计算”范式的兴起。虽然人工智能有望提高数据分析的效率和严谨性,但人们仍对其与解释主义的契合度存在担忧。