Assessing good qualitative research in the work psychology field: A response to the commentaries

Catherine Cassell; Gillian Symon

doi:10.1111/j.2044-8325.2011.02043.x

Assessing good qualitative research in the work psychology field: A response to the commentaries

Catherine Cassell^*, Gillian Symon

^*Corresponding author for this work

Birmingham Business School

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/debate › peer-review

Abstract

This article is a response to three commentaries (Halbesleben, 2011; Hickson, 2011 & Locke, 2011) on 'Assessing "good" qualitative research in the work psychology field: A narrative analysis' (Cassell & Symon, 2011).

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	666-668
Number of pages	3
Journal	Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology
Volume	84
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.2011.02043.x
Publication status	Published - Dec 2011

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Applied Psychology
Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Access to Document

10.1111/j.2044-8325.2011.02043.x

Cite this

@article{d8c3646211374c5799cdb72b290aa576,

title = "Assessing good qualitative research in the work psychology field: A response to the commentaries",

abstract = "This article is a response to three commentaries (Halbesleben, 2011; Hickson, 2011 \& Locke, 2011) on 'Assessing {"}good{"} qualitative research in the work psychology field: A narrative analysis' (Cassell \& Symon, 2011).",

author = "Catherine Cassell and Gillian Symon",

year = "2011",

month = dec,

doi = "10.1111/j.2044-8325.2011.02043.x",

language = "English",

volume = "84",

pages = "666--668",

journal = "Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology",

issn = "0963-1798",

publisher = "Wiley",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Assessing good qualitative research in the work psychology field

T2 - A response to the commentaries

AU - Cassell, Catherine

AU - Symon, Gillian

PY - 2011/12

Y1 - 2011/12

N2 - This article is a response to three commentaries (Halbesleben, 2011; Hickson, 2011 & Locke, 2011) on 'Assessing "good" qualitative research in the work psychology field: A narrative analysis' (Cassell & Symon, 2011).

AB - This article is a response to three commentaries (Halbesleben, 2011; Hickson, 2011 & Locke, 2011) on 'Assessing "good" qualitative research in the work psychology field: A narrative analysis' (Cassell & Symon, 2011).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=81355138190&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.2044-8325.2011.02043.x

DO - 10.1111/j.2044-8325.2011.02043.x

M3 - Comment/debate

AN - SCOPUS:81355138190

SN - 0963-1798

VL - 84

SP - 666

EP - 668

JO - Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology

JF - Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology

IS - 4

ER -

Assessing good qualitative research in the work psychology field: A response to the commentaries

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this