Qualitative Research: The “good,” the “bad,” the “ugly”
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24377/EJQRP.article3104Abstract
This article explores what constitutes “Good,” “Bad,” and “Ugly” qualitative research towards more fully appreciating of the nature and vision of its project. In the first two sections, I define qualitative research and map variants. Then, after highlighting qualitative evaluation criteria, I explore key issues and themes of what seems to make research “Good,” “Bad,” or “Ugly”. In the latter half of the paper, I focus specifically on four broad types of qualitative research (literature review, phenomenology, narrative-ethnographic research and discourse analysis), critically discussing a good exemplar of each. To make my strategic selections more transparent and show my role in the construction of this paper, reflexive passages are offered. Here, I engage versions of personal/introspective and methodological/contextual reflexivity plus utilise some embodied and ethical reflexivity.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Versions
- 09-10-2024 (2)
- 24-09-2024 (1)
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Linda Finlay

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.