Abstract
The purpose of this mixed methods case study was to examine the generalization practices in qualitative research published in a reputable qualitative journal. In order to accomplish this, all qualitative research articles published in Qualitative Report since its inception in 1990 (n = 273) were examined. A quantitative analysis of the all 125 empirical qualitative research articles revealed that a significant proportion (i.e., 29.6%) of studies involved generalizations beyond the underlying sample that were made inappropriately by the author(s). A qualitative analysis identified the types of over-generalizations that occurred, which included making general recommendations for future practice and providing general policy implications based only on a few cases. Thus, a significant proportion of articles published in Qualitative Report lack what we call interpretive consistency.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 881-892 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Quality and Quantity |
| Volume | 44 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2010 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Keywords
- Analytic generalization
- Case study
- Generalization
- Interpretive consistency
- Mixed methods
- Qualitative research
- Sample size
- Sampling
- Sequential mixed methods analysis
- Statistical generalization
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Statistics and Probability
- General Social Sciences