Skip to main content

Research Repository

Advanced Search

Arguments for 'British Pluralism' in qualitative health research

Johnson, M; Long, T; White, A

Authors

M Johnson

A White



Abstract

Aims of the study. This paper examines the argument that certain qualitative research methods can be used in 'pure' forms. Whilst rigid adherence to particular published procedures might be possible, we argue that in many cases this is neither necessary nor more likely to increase the validity of the research outcome.
Methodological purity. In examining the works of well-known claimants to particular research approaches such as grounded theory and phenomenology we show that purity of method is uncommon. In particular it is possible to demonstrate that all published qualitative methods are subject to their own underlying relativist philosophy. The implication of this is that all are social constructions and that their execution will necessarily be negotiated in time and context.
Conclusion. We conclude that analysis of varied examples of qualitative research shows methods to be more flexible than is often admitted. What we describe as 'British Pluralism' is an attempt to accept this reality whilst maintaining rigour through integrity, clear accounts, reflexivity and constructive critique of one's own work and that of others.

Citation

Johnson, M., Long, T., & White, A. (2001). Arguments for 'British Pluralism' in qualitative health research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 33(2), 243-249. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2001.01659.x

Journal Article Type Article
Publication Date Jan 1, 2001
Deposit Date Dec 12, 2008
Journal Journal of Advanced Nursing
Print ISSN 0309-2402
Publisher Wiley
Peer Reviewed Peer Reviewed
Volume 33
Issue 2
Pages 243-249
DOI https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2001.01659.x
Publisher URL http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/120829401/HTMLSTART
Related Public URLs http://www.ingentaconnect.com