“Grab” and Good Science: Writing Up the Results of Qualitative Research
- 1 February 2005
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Qualitative Health Research
- Vol. 15 (2) , 256-262
- https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732304268796
Abstract
Qualitative researchers have an array of choices in how to write up their research. Yet many write in distanced, third-person voices and give short shrift to the voices of informants, as if neither they nor their informants were part of the research. In doing so, they might believe that their writing style is scientific. Unfortunately, such styles of writing not only silence their informants and themselves, but many times they also contradict the philosophies of science on which many forms of qualitative research are based. If our philosophies of science are science, then how we write up our research, when it is consistent with our science, must logically be scientific. “Grab,” or writing that is both interesting and memorable, goes hand in hand with good science.Keywords
This publication has 7 references indexed in Scilit:
- Guest Editor’s Introduction: “A Self-Fashioned Gallery of Aesthetic Practice”Qualitative Inquiry, 2003
- Conjectures and RefutationsQualitative Social Work, 2002
- Critical ethnography: The reflexive turnInternational Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 2002
- Fingernails Painted Red: A Feminist, Semiotic Analysis of a “Hot” TextQualitative Inquiry, 1999
- Methodological Pluralism and Qualitative Family ResearchPublished by Springer Nature ,1999
- Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial PerspectiveFeminist Studies, 1988
- Writing CulturePublished by University of California Press ,1986