What's in a name? Qualitative description revisited

Margarete Sandelowski

2009Published
4.2KCitations
0References
journal articleType

Abstract

Abstract “Whatever Happened to Qualitative Description?” (Sandelowski, 2000) was written to critique the prevailing tendency in qualitative health research to claim the use of methods that were not actually used and to clarify a methodological approach rarely identified as a distinctive method. The article has generated several misconceptions, most notably that qualitative description requires no interpretation of data. At the root of these misconceptions is the persistent challenge of defining qualitative research methods. Qualitative description is a “distributed residual category” (Bowker & Star, 2000). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press) in the classification of these methods. Its value lies not only in the knowledge its use can produce, but also as a vehicle for presenting and treating research methods as living entities that resist simple classification. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Res Nurs Health 33:77–84, 2010

Journal: Research in Nursing & Health

Publisher: Wiley

Citations are the number of DOI-registered works in Crossref that cite this paper; references are how many works it cites. Full text is on the publisher site via the DOI link.