Assessing 'good' qualitative research in the work psychology field: A narrative analysis

Catherine Cassell, Gillian Symon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

35 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper considers how work psychologists define 'good' qualitative research in the work psychology domain. In addressing the assessment of quality in work psychology research, we draw on 22 in-depth interviews with work psychologists about their current practices and expectations around qualitative research. Using narrative analysis, the various plots and narratives that constitute how interviewees understand good qualitative research are identified. The implications of the use of these narratives for both how quality is understood and the use of qualitative research in this area are addressed. Drawing on Weick's concept of sensemaking as a theoretical framework, it is argued that the narratives identified enable the construction of a hegemonic understanding of what is good methodological practice within the work psychology discipline. The implications of this for the work psychology field and the methodological practices of work psychologists are considered.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)633-650
Number of pages18
JournalJournal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology
Volume84
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2011

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Applied Psychology
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Assessing 'good' qualitative research in the work psychology field: A narrative analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this