Please answer the following questions in complete sentences:

QUALITIATIVE RESEARCH CRITIQUE GUIDE
1. Is the research tradition for the qualitative study identified? If none was identified, can one be inferred? If more than one
was identified, is this justifiable or does it suggest “method slurring”?
2. Does the study purpose match the study design? Was the best possible design (or research tradition) used to address the
study purpose? Is the research question congruent with a qualitative approach and with the specific research tradition?
3. Is the design appropriate, given the research question? Does the design lend itself to a through, in-depth, intensive
examination of the phenomenon of interest?
4. Does the report describe an explicit theoretical or conceptual framework for the study? If not, does the absence of a
framework detract from the significance of the research or its conceptual integration?
5. Given the nature of the data, was the data analysis approach appropriate for the research design?
6. Is the category scheme described? If so, does the scheme appear logical and complete? Does there seem to be unnecessary
overlap or redundancy in the categories? Were manual methods used to index and organize the data, or was a computer
program used?
7. Did the report adequately describe the process by which the actual analysis was preformed? Did the report indicate whose
approach to data analysis was used (e.g., Glaserian or Straussian, in grounded theory studies)?
8. What major themes or processes emerged? If excerpts from the data are provided, do the themes appear to capture the
meaning of the narratives?
9. What evidence did the report provide that the analysis is accurate and replicable? Were data displayed in a manner that
allows you to verify the researcher’s conclusions?
10. Did the analysis yield a meaningful and insightful picture of the phenomenon under study? Did the report give you a clear
picture of the social or emotional world of study participants?
11. Which specific techniques (if any) did the researcher use to enhance the trustworthiness and integrity of the inquiry?
Where these strategies used judiciously and to good effect? Given the efforts to enhance data quality, what can you conclude
about the study’s validity/integrity/rigor/trustworthiness? Does the report adequately address the transferability of the
findings?
12. Did the report discuss any study limitations and their possible effects on the credibility of the results or on interpretations
of the data? Were results interpreted in light of findings from other studies? Did the researchers discuss the study’s
implications for clinical practice or future research?