Qualitative research between craftsmanship and McDonaldization. A keynote address from the 17th Qualitative Health Research Conference

Abstract

Although qualitative research methods remain marginalized in certain disciplines, qualitative inquiry has within the last couple of decades become generally accepted as a legitimate scientific way of working. Today, society at large is making more use of qualitative research than ever, not just in laudable social justice research, for example, but also in relation to market and consumer research and focus groups for different political parties. With this in mind, I wish to discuss three current questions for qualitative researchers: The first I will refer to as “ethical progressivism versus new ethical challenges”. Is qualitative research as such more ethical and progressive than quantitative research (as some have argued), or do qualitative researchers on the contrary face more elusive and perhaps difficult ethical challenges? The second question is called “solid evidence versus subjective anecdotes”. How should qualitative researchers respond to the current call for evidence? Should they seek legitimacy by accepting the dominant politics of evidence, or should they play by their own rules with the risk of increasing marginalization? The third question is “method versus intuition”. Should qualitative researchers strive for maximum transparency by following accepted methods, or should they proceed more intuitively like artists to create their stories? Both sides of the questions have their influential advocates today. I will argue that all three questions are handled most fruitfully by conceiving of qualitative research as a craft.