International Journal of Social Research Methodology· 2016Q1
Exploring rigour in autoethnographic research
- 226citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2016year
Short summary
Autoethnographic research requires specific criteria to establish its academic rigour and credibility, distinct from traditional quantitative measures.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Traditional quantitative research criteria are often unsuitable for evaluating autoethnographic studies.
- Autoethnography faces scrutiny regarding its validity and rigour within qualitative research.
- Developing specific appraisal criteria is crucial for establishing the academic integrity of autoethnographic research.
- The researcher's personal experience informs the discussion on rigour in autoethnography.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
AbstractThe changing face of qualitative research has opened up discourses on the validity and rigour of research processes and products. A current debate is whether the criteria traditionally used to judge the rigour of quantitative research are appropriate to assess the academic integrity of qualitative research including autoethnography. The purpose of this article is to appraise views on the academic rigour, validity and scientific accountability of research in general and autoethnographic research in particular. The researcher reports on issues of rigour in conducting autoethnographic research from her own experience and that of published autoethnographic researchers. The issue of relevant appraisal criteria against which the research integrity and rigour of autoethnographic studies can be assessed is investigated. It is concluded that the academic rigour of autoethnographic studies should be established to enhance its credibility and value and that the criteria used need to be judiciously determined and applied.Keywords: Research integrityresearch trustworthinessqualitative researchautoethnographic researchresearch criteriaresearch rigour
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 2016 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: General Social Sciences
General Social SciencesSocial Sciences