Evaluating Qualitative Research in Social Geography: Establishing ‘Rigour’ in Interview Analysis

Abstract

A review of 31 empirical and eighteen substantive papers by qualitative social geographers mainly using in‐depth interviews reveals little explicit reference to the principle(s) adopted to enhance ‘rigour’ and to ensure meaningful inference. Given the modest explicit discussion of evaluative criteria in these papers, a scheme from evaluation research itself is critically reviewed. A set of evaluation questions derived from this review and their application to an empirical piece of qualitative work frame an argument for a general set of criteria rather than rigid rules for assessing qualitative work. Such criteria can serve as anchor points for qualitative evaluation.

Cite this

Jamie Baxter, John D. Eyles (1997). Evaluating Qualitative Research in Social Geography: Establishing ‘Rigour’ in Interview Analysis. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0020-2754.1997.00505.x

@article{jamie1997evaluating,
  title  = {Evaluating Qualitative Research in Social Geography: Establishing ‘Rigour’ in Interview Analysis},
  author = {Baxter, Jamie and Eyles, John D.},
  year   = {1997},
  journal = {Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers},
  doi    = {10.1111/j.0020-2754.1997.00505.x}
}

Citations in this library

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 1,170 citations exist upstream.

References

Cited by