Criteria for Evaluating Qualitative Research

• Author: Valerie Anderson
• Date: 01 June 2017
• Published date: 01 June 2017
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21282

HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY, vol. 28, no. 2, Summer 2017 © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/hrdq.21282 125

Criteria for Evaluating Qualitative

Research

Valerie Anderson

Within human resource development (HRD) there is an increasing call for

in-depth qualitative research to enhance the evidence base associated with

the field. However, like the HRD community across the world, the qualitative

research community is a disparate one. Different scholars draw on a range of

research strategies that include (but are not limited to) case study, ethnog-

raphy, phenomenology, grounded theory, biographical, narrative, historical,

and participatory inquiry (Denzin, 2017 ). Qualitative research is a vibrant

and emerging field; different epistemological and disciplinary positions are

represented, and, given the emergent and diverse nature of the field, it is not

surprising that no consensus has been achieved about ‘rigor’. Indeed, even the

term rigor is contested (Barusch, Gringeri, & George, 2011 ).

As the leading journal concerned with empirical research in the HRD

field, the editors of Human Resource Development Quarterly (HRDQ) are clear

that researcher reputation, citation, and impact scores are not simple “proxies”

for research quality; nor are they the basis of judgments of our own work and

that of others (cf. Denzin, 2017 ). As the field of research continues to develop,

in both predictable and unexpected ways, it is important that we continuously

review and clarify our editorial expectations of criteria for quality and excel-

lence in qualitative research, and so this editorial addresses two questions:

• How is HRD research and scholarship enriched through qualitative

research?

• What criteria are appropriate for evaluating the quality of qualitative

research?

In addressing these questions, I focus on qualitative research; the field of

mixed-methods research is outside the scope of this editorial. Rigor in mixed

methods and in quantitative research will be the subject of subsequent edito-

rials. These criteria are built upon the insights and experiences of qualitative

researchers from a variety of disciplinary traditions, and, where possible, I

indicate exemplary work from the HRD field to illustrate the points.

EDITORIAL