Features of a strong report
Writers on qualitative methods broadly agree that readers should be able to see how a researcher got from the data to the claims. Sarah Tracy's framework of eight criteria speaks of worthy topics, rich rigor, sincerity, credibility, resonance, significant contribution, ethics, and meaningful coherence.
- A clear question matched to the approach chosen
- An explicit account of sampling and data collection
- A transparent description of how coding or analysis proceeded
- Quotations or observations that support and test each theme
- Reflection on how the researcher's position shaped the work
Common weaknesses
Weak reports often summarize interview questions as themes, or offer brief quotations without interpretation. Others announce a method such as thematic analysis without showing how it was carried out. Braun and Clarke emphasize that themes do not simply emerge, but are actively constructed by researchers, and that claims should be presented accordingly.
Debate over checklists
Reporting standards such as COREQ improve the completeness of published reports, and journals frequently request them. Yet qualitative traditions differ in their philosophical assumptions, so a single checklist cannot fit them all. Practices such as agreement between multiple coders or respondent validation are valued in some traditions and regarded as misplaced in others. Following a checklist also does not guarantee insight. The best reports match their standards to their aims and say so openly.
Further reading
- Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2).
- Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ). International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6).
- Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight big-tent criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10).