Communicating Qualitative Research: Some Practical Guideposts for Scholars

• Author: Abbie E. Goldberg,Katherine R. Allen
• Published date: 01 February 2015
• Date: 01 February 2015
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12153

A E. G Clark University

K R. A Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University∗

Communicating Qualitative Research: Some

Practical Guideposts for Scholars

The purpose of this article is to provide guid-

ance to scholars regarding key aspects of writing

qualitative manuscripts. The aim is to offer prac-

tical suggestions as opposed to examining epis-

temological or theoretical issues and debates

related to qualitative family research. The

authors begin by providingguideposts in writing

the major sections of a qualitative article (Intro-

duction, Method, Results, and Discussion). In

doing so, they address issues such as composing

a literature review, providing sufcient details

on the qualitative data analysis, and effectively

communicating the contribution of the work.

They end by providing some generalsuggestions

for scholars seeking professional development

in qualitative research methods and analysis.

In the current article we seek to build on the

foundational contributions of other scholars

who have provided guidance on how to present

and publish qualitative research (e.g., Ambert,

Adler, Adler, & Detzner,1995; Matthews, 2005)

as well as the momentum generated by recent

articles on the epistemology, conduct, and pre-

sentation of qualitative family research (e.g.,

Department of Psychology, Clark University, 950 Main St.,

Worcester,MA 01610 (agoldberg@clarku.edu).

∗Department of Human Development, VirginiaPolytechnic

Institute and State University,Blacksburg, VA 24061.

This article was edited by Kevin M. Roy.

KeyWords: professional development, qualitative data anal-

ysis, qualitative family research, qualitative methods, writ-

ing.

LaRossa, 2012; Zvonkovic, Sharp, & Radina,

2012). Our primary aim is to provide guidance to

scholars regarding key aspects of writing qual-

itative manuscripts. Our goal is not to be overly

didactic but rather to provide guideposts that

will prove instructive to individuals who wish to

publish qualitative work in the Journal of Mar-

riage and Family (JMF)aswellasotherfamily

journals. We recognize that there is an inherent

danger in providing guidelines in that such

guidelines can be interpreted as rules or as the

keys to success. Thus, we underscore that in our

effort to help others be successful in publishing

their qualitative work, we do not wish to provide

a new mandate to be followed or to promise that

following these steps will guarantee success.

Neither do we wish these suggestions to be seen

as though we are offering a step-by-step formula

or rubric whereby, if each item is checked off,

then the goal has been met. Our aim, then, is to

provide practical guideposts—but not to stie

the creative efforts that are the hallmark of

outstanding qualitative research. We recognize

that adhering to guidelines is in tension with

“breaking out of the mold.” Thus, we encourage

scholars to hold these guidelines lightly, so as

to fully engage the creative possibilities that can

come from the qualitative representation of data.

A related aim of this article is to encourage

scholars to submit their qualitative research to

JMF so that there is more high-quality research

to review and publish. Throughout the past sev-

eral decades, scholars have noted that a paucity

of qualitative research is published in JMF (e.g.,

Ambert et al., 1995; LaRossa, 2012; LaRossa

Journal of Marriage and Family 77 (February 2015): 3–22 3

DOI:10.1111/jomf.12153

4Journal of Marriage and Family

& Wolf, 1985; Matthews, 2005) as well as in

other family journals (see Humble, 2012). In

turn, the lack of qualitative research published

in JMF was recently the focus of a special

issue of JMF (see LaRossa, 2012). This special

issue, along with a special issue of the Journal

of Family Theory and Review (see Zvonkovic

et al., 2012), were designed to spark new dia-

logue about the “culture” of qualitative research

in family studies and to assess the publication

of qualitative family research in recent years.

These efforts prompted the formation of a Quali-

tative Research Commission: a group of scholars

whose charge was, in part, to provide guidance

for writing, reviewing, and editing qualitative

works submitted to JMF (see LaRossa, 2012,

p. 657).Thus, we hope that this article will

contribute to the current interest in and ongo-

ing efforts to stimulate a more vibrant qualita-

tive research culture in JMF. Furthermore, we

hope that these guideposts will be helpful in

aiding qualitative family researchers in publish-

ing in other premier journals (Huy, 2012), as

well as aiding primarily quantitative researchers

who review qualitative work for JMF and other

journals.

Toward this end, we next address the major

sections of a qualitative research article in

JMF (Introduction, Method, Results, and Dis-

cussion). We end by providing some general

suggestions for scholars seeking professional

development in qualitative research methods

and analysis. Again, the primary goal of this

article is to provide practical suggestions as

opposed to examining epistemological or theo-

retical issues and debates related to qualitative

research. Given the momentum in the family

eld for qualitative research, there are many

additional resources for such theoretical elabo-

ration and debates (see, e.g., K. R. Allen, 2000;

Daly, 2007; Gilgun, 2013; LaRossa, 2005, 2012;

Zvonkovic et al., 2012).

I  Q A

The introductory material of a qualitative article

should typically constitute about 20%–25% of

the overall document. Thus, in a 35-page article,

the Introduction would be approximately 7–9

manuscript pages. (Of note is that our guidelines

for page lengths come from our own experience;

other authors, such as Matthews, 2005, havepro-

vided additional advice.) In general, the Intro-

duction begins with a review of the literature and

ends with a description of the current study foci

and goals. Alternatively, authors may prefer to

provide a description of the current study early

on in the article, before reviewingthe relevant lit-

erature. Regardless of where the current study is

discussed, the literature review should be orga-

nized around establishing what is known about

the topic and how the current study will add to

the extant knowledge base. A basic, and exible,

guide to the key sections of the Introduction is as

follows: (a) theoretical framework initially guid-

ing the study, (b) literature review (beginning

with an introduction to the topic), (c) the cur-

rent study, and (d) research questions. An alter-

native organizational strategy might be (a) liter-

ature review, (b) the current study, (c) research

questions, and (d) theoretical framework. Or,

nally, (a) the current study, (b) research ques-

tions, (c) theoretical framework, and (d) litera-

ture review. The exact organization of the Intro-

duction will depend on the authors, their goals,

and the focus of the article. Furthermore, authors

should also consult the journal (e.g., JMF)for

examples of different organizational formats as

well as examples of qualitative manuscript con-

tent and presentation.

Theoretical Framework

It may be helpful to think of theory as at the “cen-

ter” of the qualitative research process (Gilgun,

1992; Marshall & Rossman, 1989). Indeed, even

if qualitative researchers have the goal of gen-

erating theory through the process of data col-

lection and analysis (e.g., if they are using a

grounded-theory methodology), they have also

rst conceptualized the study within a partic-

ular theoretical tradition. In other words, the

qualitative research process revolvesaround, and

draws from, theory at every step, including sit-

uating the need for the study, establishing the

study focus and research questions, interview-

ing participants, observing in the eld, analyz-

ing and interpreting the data, and writing up

the data (Creswell, 2008). In turn, specifying

the theory or clusters of theories (i.e., theoret-

ical framework) that informed the selection of

the research design, the framing of the study,

the research questions, and the data analysis is

essential. Our use of the term theoretical frame-

work, then, refers to the explicit statement of the

particular school(s) of thought from which the

concepts used in the study were derived and how