Search results

The study aims to promote the use of qualitative methods in service research by investigating how these methods are reported in service journals, how the level of reporting has evolved and whether methodological reporting influences the downloads or citations received by qualitative articles.

Methodological reporting practices were identified through content analysis of 318 qualitative articles published in three major service research journals and comparison with prior methodological literature. Regression analysis was used to test how the level of methodological reporting influences article downloads and citations.

The study identifies 29 reporting practices related to 9 key methodological reporting areas. The overall level of methodological reporting in published qualitative articles has increased over time. While differences in the level of reporting between service journals persist, they are narrowing. The level of methodological reporting did not influence downloads or citations of qualitative articles.

Service scholars using qualitative methods should pay attention to methodological reporting as it can improve the chances of being published. Factors such as theoretical contributions are likely to have a greater influence on article impact than methodological reporting.

No prior study has explored methodological reporting practices across different qualitative methodologies or how reporting influences article impact. For authors, reviewers and editors, the study provides an inventory of reporting practices relevant for evaluating qualitative articles, which should lower barriers for qualitative methods in service research by providing practical guidelines on what to focus on when reporting and assessing qualitative research.

Qualitative research is well-established and widely adopted across a range of disciplines; however, there is little discussion of the teaching of qualitative research methods. What engagements there are primarily focus on methods rather than core concepts that inform ethical and effective use of those approaches. “Subjectivity” and “reflexivity” are pervasive concepts taken up in numerous textbooks, handbooks, and journal guidelines. But, despite being an expected and critical aspect of qualitative methodologies, few scholars consider how researchers might learn to engage with these necessary aspects effectively.

This is a conceptual paper written from the authors' experiences teaching qualitative research to graduate students at the master's and doctoral levels.

This conceptual paper offers an andragogical discussion of how novice and student researchers might learn to consider the concepts of reflexivity and subjectivity. Additionally, it considers how the deep and critical reflection inherent in both subjectivity and reflexivity are valuable aspects in extending discussions and applications of qualitative research in various disciplines.

This paper offers a fresh and unique consideration of teaching novice researchers how to practice reflexivity and examine their subjectivities using the work of Alan Peshkin as a model.

This paper aims to identify specific challenges and opportunities when crafting literature reviews of qualitative accounting research. In addition, it offers potential remedies to frequent challenges when conducting such reviews.

This piece is based on recent methodological advice on conducting literature reviews and my own experience when conducting and publishing reviews that primarily cover qualitative accounting research.

The author chart three typical advantages and three typical use cases of literature reviews of qualitative accounting research, as well as the typical process steps and outputs of such reviews. Along with these process steps, The author identifies three overarching specific challenges when conducting such reviews and discusses potential remedies. Overall, this paper suggests that literature reviews of qualitative accounting research feature idiosyncratic challenges but offer specific opportunities at the same time.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is among the first to offer advice on the specific challenges and opportunities when conducting literature reviews of qualitative accounting research.

This study aims to describe key elements that are critical to virtual qualitative research especially while working with practitioners as participants.

This paper takes a reflexive researcher approach using a case study to explore how researchers adopted a qualitative research approach using digital technology. We use five principles suggested by Boland et al. (2022) as a framework to consider and reflect on our experiences as researchers and those of our participants.

We highlight the gatekeeper’s support, trusted relationship with the organisations, interpersonal skills of interviewers, stringent measures of securing data and shared experiences of interviewee and interviewers helped complete virtual research. We recommend that four key factors such as digital competency, feasibility, flexibility and resilience should be considered while undertaking or commissioning virtual, qualitative research studies.

Social care practitioners and qualitative researchers increasingly negotiate with digital technologies to undertake their work. In this paper, we evidence how online qualitative approaches can be effective provided challenges are dealt with diligently in each stage of the research process.

The lack of a definite standard for determining the sample size in qualitative research leaves the research process to the initiative of the researcher, and this situation overshadows the scientificity of the research. The primary purpose of this research is to propose a model by questioning the problem of determining the sample size, which is one of the essential issues in qualitative research. The fuzzy logic model is proposed to determine the sample size in qualitative research.

Considering the structure of the problem in the present study, the proposed fuzzy logic model will benefit and contribute to the literature and practical applications. In this context, ten variables, namely scope of research, data quality, participant genuineness, duration of the interview, number of interviews, homogeneity, information strength, drilling ability, triangulation and research design, are used as inputs. A total of 20 different scenarios were created to demonstrate the applicability of the model proposed in the research and how the model works.

The authors reflected the results of each scenario in the table and showed the values for the sample size in qualitative studies in Table 4. The research results show that the proposed model's results are of a quality that will support the literature. The research findings show that it is possible to develop a model using the laws of fuzzy logic to determine the sample size in qualitative research.

The model developed in this research can contribute to the literature, and in any case, it can be argued that determining the sample volume is a much more effective and functional model than leaving it to the initiative of the researcher.

While, supply chain resilience (SCRES) continues to be a dominant topic in both academic and business literature and has gained more attention recently, there is limited knowledge on SCRES capabilities specific to business functions. The purpose of this paper is to identify and investigate capabilities shared between supply, operations and logistics that are most important for SCRES.

To address this gap, the authors followed a multi-method research approach. First, the authors used the grounded theory method to generate a theoretical framework based on interviews with 51 managers from five companies in automotive SCs. Next, the authors empirically validated the framework using a survey of 340 SC professionals from the manufacturing industry.

Five significant capabilities emerged from the qualitative study; all were significant in empirical validation. This research advances the knowledge of SCRES as it informs managerial decision-making by identifying capabilities common to supply, logistics and operations that impact SCRES.

This research advances the knowledge of SCRES as it informs managerial decision-making by identifying capabilities common to supply, logistics and operations that impact SCRES. In addition, the findings of this research help managers better allocate resources among significant capabilities.

This paper illustrates how Guba and Lincoln's parallel criteria for establishing trustworthiness, can be adapted and applied to qualitative research on indigenous social protection systems. It provides insights for social protection researchers, exploring plausible qualitative research rigor evaluation criteria, on plausible alternatives.

The paper draws on qualitative evidence from a larger ethnographic study on the dynamics of indigenous social protection systems in Nigeria. It illustrates the systematic application of Guba and Lincoln's parallel criteria.

Available evidence from the study shows that Guba and Lincoln's parallel criteria is viable for establishing trustworthiness of qualitative research on indigenous social protection systems. The criteria can facilitate credible and reliable research outcomes in research on improving social protection policy and practice.

Qualitative inquiries that draw on Guba and Lincoln's parallel criteria as evaluation criteria for trustworthiness can complement quantitative research on social protection. This makes it imperative to incorporate both, in social protection research for a holistic system. How this can be done is beyond the scope of this paper but needs to be explored by future research.

Contrary to the use of Guba and Lincoln's parallel criteria in qualitative research in other contexts, the use of the criteria has not been carefully examined in qualitative research on indigenous social protection systems. This paper is an attempt to fill this gap.

The development of qualitative research methods addresses the need to explore, understand and interpret complex and subjective phenomena across various fields of study. These methods are guided by methodological frameworks, and data collection involves taking several precautions for observation or interviews. While these guidelines facilitate an emphasis on the objective aspects of discourse, accounting for subjectivity and emotions proves more challenging. However, these subjectivity and emotions are deemed as significant sources of information. In this chapter, we propose an innovative data collection method centred around creating collages and engaging in group discussions to decipher their meaning. Collage serves as a visual medium, and we recommend utilising semiotic analysis tools to comprehend its significance. To gain a more precise understanding of the value of collage as a data collection method, we studied a collage workshop organised by CREE. Through image analysis and exchanges, our findings reveal that collage acts as a physical medium that fosters exchanges, deepens ideas and restricts digressions. Additionally, collage allows for the expression and discussion of emotions linked to the image rather than the individual. The space of intersubjective reflexivity facilitated by collage enables a profound comprehension, critical assessment and augmentation of ideas and the interpretation of emotions without compromising the sensitivity of the author. This chapter’s main contribution is evidently manifested here.