A Practical Approach to Desig

Conducting, and Analyzing Analyzing Fo

Groups

Susan Zick d mun , PhD

Director, Director, Qualitative Qualitative Research Research Core

VA Pittsburgh Pittsburgh Healthcare Healthcare System

Center for Health Equity Research Research and Promotion Promotion (CH

(CH

Departments Departments Departments Departments of Medicine Medicine Medicine Medicine and Clinical Clinical Clinical Clinical and Translational Translational Translational Translational S

S

SS

University of Pittsburgh
Goal for the CyberSemin

CyberSemin

Provide Provide the practical practical details details needed to 

and analyze focus g p rou data.
Organization of the Semin

Semin

1. Definition Definition and design of focus groups

2. A step by step guide to conducting conducting conducting conducting fo

groups within the VA

3. The codb k e oo construct construction and codin

process

4. A brief mention mention of “virtual” “virtual” focus gro
Audience Poll

Level of experience experience conducting conducting focus gro

gro

(1) No experience(2) Some experience(3) A great deal of experience experience
PART 1

DEFINITION DEFINITION AND DESIGN OF FGROUPS
Definition of a focus grou

A form of data collection collection with the goa

“describin “describing and understandin understanding pp 

ercep

interpretations, interpretations, and beliefs beliefs of a select

population population population population to gain understanding understanding understanding understanding of a

particular particular issue from the perspectives perspectives 

group’s group’s participants” participants” participants” (Khan & Mander

ManderMander
When to use a focus grou

Choose a focus group over an interview 

the goal is to:

Discuss Discuss attitudes attitudes about products, products, devices, devices, c

c

Pilot test surveys or study designs

Generate Generate new ideas on a topicGain competing competing viewpoints viewpointsShed light on quantitative quantitative study findings findings

KEY: The goal is to gain something new 

emerges emerges through through the interactions. interactions.
When not to use a focus gr

Choose an interview over a focus gro

the goal is to:

Collect Collect views on private, private, stigmatizing stigmatizing or

incriminating behaviors

Capture Capture qualitative qualitative themes from each pa

pa

When li ki n ng themes to i di id l i di id l ndividual outcome

comorbidities, depression scores)
When not to use a focus gr

Choose a telephone interview over a 

g p rou when the goal is to:

Recruit Recruit busy participants participants with demandin

demandin

conflicting conflicting schedules schedules (e.g. providers, providers, providers,

administrators)

Groups who are geographically geographically geographically dispersed dispersed dispersed

EX: diabetes diabetes educators educators from across the state

At‐ri ks popul i at ons wi ht li i d m te transpor

transpor

options, options, privacy privacy concerns, concerns, etc.
When not to use a focus gr

When the goal is to reach a group cons

cons
Number of participants per fo

group

The id l ea number of parti i c pants is 8‐10 

group.

The maximum maximum number should be ~12.

The larger the group, the harder it becomes becomes 

everyone to talk.

The minimum minimum number should be ~3.

 The fewer the people, people, the more it functions functions 

shared interview.

Try to over recruit recruit by 10‐20% to allow fo

shows.
The length of a focus gro

60 minutes minutes is typical, typical, but a discussion discussion 

extend to 90‐160 minutes.

Longer discussions discussions should include include a bI f n orm the parti i c pants of the l h engt d 

the ground rule stage to define expect

expect
Decorum and the focus gr

Always b i eg n and end on time:

Especially Especially when fitting fitting into a pre‐defined 

such as a l h unc hour

“Ty g f 

oday’s meeting will be endless with a half hou

lunch.”
The Number of focus groups ne

3‐4 discussions iscussions for a single topic.

Budget constraints constraints may bring the numbe

2.

With g p rou comparisons, arisons, double the n

n

If using different different sites, conduct conduct at leas

groups per site.

Always avoid a single focus group; the gr

dynamics dynamics may skew the discussion discussion discussion.
The Number of focus groups ne

The goal is to achieve achieve “thematic “thematic satur

satur

across the focus g p rou discussions. discussions.

Thematic Thematic saturation saturation is the means of

determining determining sample size in qualitative qualitative qualitative

research.

Saturation Saturation is reached reached when new trans

trans

reveal no new themes. themes. themes.
Consistency of data collect

collect

To help achieve achieve thematic thematic saturation: saturation:

Keep the script questions uestions in the same or

focus groups.

This allows for comparisons comparisons comparisons comparisons across groups

If extra questions questions are needed for only a f

groups, add them at the end.
composition of the Focus gr

To avoid a chilling chilling effect on the discussio

discussio

separate participants with:

Differing Differing levels of power/authority power/authority

EX: MD and non‐MD providers.

Participants Participants with negative negative views of each oth

EX: Management and union emp y lo ees during c

c

Participants Participants with vastly different different experience

experience

training.

EX: Bioinformatics Bioinformatics experts experts and members members of the 
composition of the Focus g

When making comparisons, always se

se

the p p articipants of interest interest into differe

differe

groups.

EX: Male/female Male/female Male/female, African African African American/whit

American/whit

American/whit

control control groups/intervention groups/intervention groups, groups, etc.
Script Development

Be clear on the information information needed fr

discussion.

Ask fewer questions questions than is typical typical for 

interview.

A 1 hour focus group will have ~4‐7 ques

Develop Develop probes to clarify clarify and enrich t

discussion.
Script Development

 Pilot test the focus g p rou g , uide first with te

members members and then with participants participants who ar

the target p po ulation. ulation.

 Make revisions revisions based on team feedback. feedback.

“Just got the focus group script. Fabulous
Script Development

Avoid closed‐questions .

EX: “Did you receive receive diabetes diabetes education?

education?

Eliminate Eliminate “double “double barreled” barreled” questions

questions

EX: “Do you und d erstand how to take you

medications medications and do you follow your doct

doct

ad i ?” v ce

Make questions uestions short and understand

understand
Script development

When including including differing differing populations populations 

the script to meet the lowest educatio

educatio

“May I offer a very different scenario?
PART 2

A STEP BY STEP GUIDE TO CONDU

CONDU

FOCUS GROUPS WITHIN THE VA
The environment

Choose a comfortable comfortable room with a tab

enough to hold the p p articipants.

Be sure the room is quiet and allows for A round table is ideal.

When using a rectangular rectangular table, have the

mod t era or sit in the middle ( t no at the h 

Make certain certain that participants’ participants’ electro

electro

devises devises are turned off.
The forms

Bring all informed informed informed informed consent consent consent consent documents documents documents documents 

The VA requires requires a special special consent consent fo

recording of voice.

Other forms:

Demographics Demographics are typically typically complet

complet

the discussion.

If a survey will bias the discussion, discussion, re

re

for the end.
The Refreshments

All focus groups sh ld ou provide f d oo .

Allow the p p articipants time to eat befo

focus group begins.

The more elaborate elaborate elaborate elaborate the food (e g . . box lun

than a cookie tray) the earlier earlier the particip

particip

be asked to come.

Some VA sites require require advanced advanced permissio

permissio

purchase f d oo wi ht VA f d un s.
compensation

Participants Participants will receive receive $25‐$45 per foc

Be clear with your IRB on what they defined defined 

coercion.

You may be allowed allowed to p ya for transp 

ortort

parking vouchers, etc.

The VA typically typically typically typically does not allow provider

provider

provider

provider

compensated.

Discuss Discuss whether whether VA providers providers are allowe

allowe

participate participate during work time or lunch br

br
Audio Recording

Use one or two d l igita audio recorders

Some teams also use external external microphon

microphon

A new study is using a VA laptop to recor

recor

Be sure to check with the IRB about ty

recorders recorders allowed allowed at your site.

Many require require require encryption encryption encryption and password password password

protection.

There may be forms to complete complete complete complete and lon

times before receiving receiving it at your VA.
Audio Recording

Tape recorders recorders recorders are transportable transportable transportable 

and must be kept secure at all tim

Check to see if you must carry them in 

briefcase.

Check with the IRB about downloading downloading 

files.
Beginning the Focus Gro

Once the focus group begins, begins, the mod

mod

introduces introduces her/himself her/himself along with the 

taker.

The introduction introduction introduction should include include include an

explanation explanation of the purpose purpose of the stud

the ground rules.
Ground Rules

Add the following following information information into the

introductory script:

( ) 1 How long the discussion discussion will last

(2) A disclaimer disclaimer that the discussion discussion will be audi

(3) A statement statement statement statement that participation participation participation participation is voluntary voluntary voluntary voluntary

“I “I was just going to say, `Well I don’t make the rules’. But, of course, I do make the rules.”
Ground Rules

(4) A suggestion suggestion that participants participants write aidentifier identifier on a folded index card placed ithem:

A nickname, nickname, when privacy privacy is important importantTheir own name, when participants participants know e

EX: focus groups with providers providers

Either, Either, depending depending on preference preference
Ground rules

(5) Share that there are no ri hg t or wron

responses.

(6) That the goal is to hear from everyon

everyon

(7) Respectfulness Respectfulness and turn‐taking are re

(8) Staying Staying on topic is important. important.

(9) That participants participants must maintain maintain conf

conf

about the discussion.

(10) Share logistical logistical information information (where 

restrooms restrooms are, whether whether there is a break, 
The moderator

It is critical critical to have a trained trained moderat

moderat

Avoid saving money by having an untrain

untrain

research assistant.

Trained Trained Trained Trained moderators moderators moderators moderators can costs upwards upwards upwards upwards o

focus group.

W k or for consi ts ency of mod t era ors a

focus groups.
The moderator

The job of the moderator moderator is to:

Introduce Introduce the focus g p rou topicEstablish Establish the rulesHave the participants participants participants introduce introduce introduce themsel

themselthemsel

Ask the focus group script questions questions

Draw the discussion discussion to a close

Moderators Moderators Moderators must complete complete complete the quest

quest

quest

without without running running out of time.
The moderator

The moderator moderator moderator moderator should remain neutral neutral neutral neutral s

to bias the discussion. discussion.

H /h e s e sh ld ou be encourag encouraging.

“Geez, you’re the worst focus group I’ve ever 
Furthering the discussion

Moderators Moderators use silence silence after questions questions 

encourage encourage participants participants to talk.

Probes are used to continue continue continue continue and enrich 

conversation.

For non‐talkers, talkers, the moderator moderator should 

participants participants out by nicely asking them 

their perspectives.
Closing the session

Once the final question question has been aske

moderator moderator informs informs p p articipants that t

session session is over and thanks them for thparticipation.

He/she clarifies clarifies how they will be paid 

welcomes welcomes them to the food.
Dealing with personality personality is

For participants participants who dominate dominate or who 

inapp p y ro riately:

The moderator moderator should use body languag

languag

convey disapproval.

Look at watch, withdraw withdraw eye contact, contact, physic

physic

body away from the participant participant
Dealing with personality personality is

Use language language to discourage discourage the inapprop

inapprop

behavior:

“Let’s hear from someone someone else.”

“Let’s move on.”

“Remember “Remember that we need to be respectful respectful t

everyone.”

(If a confrontation confrontation is needed) needed) “You appear t

strongly strongly about this. Can you share what it is 

topic that causes you to feel this way?”
The note taker

The note taker is a member of the team 

to record content content and non‐verbal beha

He/she develops develops develops develops a seating seating seating seating chart identif

identif

identifidentif

participants participants by their selected selected IDs.

Visual from: courses.washington.edu/nutr531/Focus_Groups_in_
The Note taker

The note taker writes notes as a back‐

case the audio recorder recorder malfunctions. malfunctions.

He/she records records the first few words of 

response response response response to help the transcriptionist transcriptionist transcriptionist transcriptionist l

statement statement to a study ID.

EX: R3—”And my mom said to me...”

He/she captures captures captures emotional emotional emotional reactions reactions reactions 

body language language during the discussion. discussion.
debriefing

Begins after the discussion, discussion, once the

p p articipants have left

Involves Involves the moderator moderator and the note tThe d b i fi debriefing focuses on the overall

impression, impression, the interpersonal interpersonal dynami

dynami

the non‐verbal communication communication that is captured captured on the tape.
PART 3

THE CODEBOOK CODEBOOK CONSTRUCTIO

CONSTRUCTIO

AND CODING PROCESS PROCESS.
Transcription

Coding requires requires a high‐quality, verbat

transcri transcription of the focus g p rou s.

Transcription Transcription is very expensive: expensive: $15‐$

hour, depending depending depending depending on level of experienc

experienc

experienc

experienc

Professional Professional services services exist, but they re

re

going outside outside of the VA.
Transcription

Focus groups are more d ff l i icu t to tran

tran

as there are multiple multiple participants participants to

distinguish between.

The transcriber transcriber must incorporate the 

taker’s taker’s notes to help determine determine whichp p articipant was sp g eakin .

Best to either use a highly trained trained

transcriptionist transcriptionist transcriptionist transcriptionist for focus groups or to 

moderator moderator or note taker (if trained). trained).
Qualitative methodolog

All qualitative qualitative coding must extend fro

qualitative ualitative methodolo methodology.

Can include:

G dd roun ed theory

Content analysis

Descriptive qualitative analysisEditing Editing Editing Editing style by Crabtree Crabtree Crabtree Crabtree and Miller
the analysis

Begin by reading reading the transcripts. transcripts.

Get a feel for the data.

All interpretations interpretations must be grounded grounded 

text.

There are two approaches approaches to the final 

A summary reportA qualitative qualitative analysis analysis
Summary report

From the debriefin debriefing, create a docume

docume

describing describing each focus group.

Create a summary summary summary summary report that synthes

synthes

synthes

synthes

main themes emerging emerging from all of the 

groups.

Include insightful quotations

The goal of the summary summary report is to c

information information in a condensed condensed format rat

seeking peer review publication. ication.
qualitative analysis

Qualitative Qualitative team members members read the

transcri transcripts (and other notes) and deve

codebook.

The final codebook codebook codebook will contain contain contain

inclusion/exclusion inclusion/exclusion criteria criteria for each code 

clear and borderline borderline borderline quotations quotations quotations.

The approach approach described described here focuses focuses 

question‐specific format.
Question‐specific codebo

 Examine Examine a question question and use its structure structure and the a

a

by the participants participants to organize organize the coding. coding.

 EX: “Is anything anything missing missing in patient patient notes?: notes?: ANYTHING MISSING – YES

 Related Related diagnosis diagnosis (MST),

 How diagnosis diagnosis came about in the 1st place, who diagnosed diagnosed and wh

 Reason for the appointment, appointment,

 Treatment Treatment plan, future appointment, appointment,

 title, contact contact information information and discipline discipline of note taker

 ANYTHING MISSING – DON’T KNOW ‐

 ANYTHING MISSINIG – NO

 Codes are organized organized into categories categories in terms of ho

the question question and then are broken down into speci

speci
Qualitative coding

This approach approach allows for fine grained grained 

the level of the question. uestion.

Global codes that capture capture themes acr

focus groups can also be used.

EX: “Discussion “Discussion of suicide.” suicide.”
Qualitative coding

Software Software such as Atlas.ti Atlas.ti allows for the

conversion conversion of themes into a spreadsh

readsh

format (SPSS and Excel). Excel).

The software software software software also captures captures captures captures all of the

quotations quotations associated associated with a code.
Qualitative coding

Two coders code the focus groups, groups, wit

50% double coding.

Smaller Smaller studies studies will use 100% double cod

After independently independently coding each focus 

coders discuss discuss discuss discuss each code and adjudicat

adjudicat

adjudicatadjudicat

differences.

Adjudicated Adjudicated Adjudicated Adjudicated codes are added to a master 

The separate separate coding sheets‐‐prior to the a

a

process process‐‐are used to calculate calculate calculate calculate intercoder intercoder intercoder intercoder 
The Qualitative approac

This qualitative qualitative approach approach is more time

consumin consuming than the summary rep , ort 

be used for publications. publications.
Part 4

VIRTUAL FOCUS GROUPS
Virtual focus groups

A new approach approach to focus groups uses

computer technolo technology.

Chat sessions sessions and teleconferencing teleconferencing (S

(S

increases increases increases increases access for hard to reach pop

pop

poppop

(e.g. providers, providers, administrators). administrators).

How feasible feasible it is within the VA—given 

safety and confidentiality confidentiality confidentiality issues‐‐is no
Conclusion

Focus groups can be an effective effective way 

capture viewpoints from p p articipants.

Not all data is best captured captured using foc

groups.

However, However, when well designed designed and ana

ana

focus groups can provide provide important important in

in

into a subject.
Questions?

Susan Zik d c mun , PhD

Director, Director, Qualitative Qualitative Research Research Core

Core Faculty: Faculty: Center for Health Equity

Research Research and Promotion Promotion (CHERP), (CHERP),

VA Pittsburgh Pittsburgh Healthcare Healthcare System

Associate Associate Professor Professor of Medicine Medicine and

Clinical Clinical & Translational Translational Science Science

University of Pittsburgh

Susan.Zickmund@ g va. ov
Qualitative Research Web Resources, Updated

(Resources on Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods are in Bold)

Abu‐Lughod, L. 1993. Writing Women’s Worlds: Bedouin Stories. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Appadurai, A. 1997. “Discussion Fieldwork in the Era of Globalization,” Anthropology and Humanism 22(1) 115.Articles appearing under the special Viewpoints section. 2002. “Feminists Talking Across Worlds,” Gender, Place and Bailey, C., C. White and R. Pain. 1999. “Evaluating Qualitative Research: Dealing with the Tension Between ‘Science’ 

Area 31(2): 169‐178.

Bailey, C., C. White and R. Pain. 1999. “Response,” Area 31(2): 182‐183.

Bakker, K., L.D. Berg, C. Katz, K. Morin, B. Page, G. Pratt, K. Simonsen, E. Swyngedouw and G. Uribe. 1998. “Lost and 

Addressing Critical Human Geography,” Environment and Planning D: Society & Space 16(3): 257‐278.

Bammer, A., G. Minrose, C. Katz, and E. Meese. 1998. “The Place of the Letter: An Epistolary Exchange” in Making W

Metaphor, Materiality, S. H. Aiken, A. Brigham, S. A. Marston, and P. Waterstone, eds., Tucson: University of 202.

Barbour, R. S. and J. Kitzinger, eds. 1998. Developing Focus Group Research: Politics, Theory and Practice. Univers

Glasgow University Media Research Unit: Sage.

Barone, T. E. 1992. “Beyond Theory and Method: A Case of Critical Storytelling,” Theory into Practice 31: 142‐146.

Baxter, J. and J. Eyles. 1997. “Evaluating Qualitative Research in Social Geography Establishing ‘Rigour’ in Interview Ana

the Institute of British Geographers 22: 505‐525.

Baxter, J. and J. Eyles. 1999. “Prescription for Research Practice? Grounded Theory in Qualitative Evaluation,” Area 3

Baxter, J. and J. Eyles. 1999. “The Utility of In‐depth Interviews for Studying the Meaning of Environmental Risk,.” Pr
Geographer 51(2): 307‐320.

Behar, R. and D. Gordon, eds. 1995. Women Writing Culture. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Behar, R.. 1996. The Vulnerable Observer: Anthropology that Breaks Your Heart. Boston, MA: Beacon.

Berg, L. D. 1994. “Masculinity, Place, and a Binary Discourse of Theory and Empirical Investigation in the Human Geo

Aotearoa/New Zealand,” Gender, Place and Culture 1(2): 245‐260.

Berg, L. D. 1994. “Masculinism, Power and Discourses of Exclusion in Brian Berry’s ‘Scientific’ Geography,” Urban Ge

287.

Berg, L. D. 1998. “Reading (Post)Colonial History: Masculinity, ‘Race,’ and Rebellious Natives in the Waikato, New Ze

1863,” Historical Geography 26: 101‐127.

Berg, L. D. 1999. “Cultural Politics and the Local(e),” Nordisk Samhällsgeografisk Tidskrift 28: 3‐22.

Berg, L. D. 1999. “A (White) Man of His Times? Sir George Grey and the Narration of Hegemonic Masculinity in Victo

Refereed chapter in Masculinities in New Zealand, R. Law, H. Campbell and J. Dolan, eds. Palmerston North: 67 ‐ 83.

Berg, L. D. 2001. “Masculinism, Emplacement and Positionality in Peer Review,” The Professional Geographer 53(4): 

Berg, L. D. 2002. “(Some) Spaces of Critical Geography,” in The Student's Guide to Geography, 2nd ed. A. Rodgers an

UK and Malden USA: Blackwell. (forthcoming).

Berg, L. D. 2002. “Gender Equity as ‘Boundary Object’Š Or, the Same Old ‘Sex and Power in Geography’ All Over Aga

Geographer/ Le Géographe canadien. (forthcoming).

Berg, L. D. and R. A. Kearns. 1997. “Constructing Cultural Geographies of Aotearoa,” New Zealand Geographer 53(2)

Berg, L. D. and R. A. Kearns. 1996. “Naming as Norming: ‘Race,’ Gender and the Identity Politics of Naming Places in

Aotearoa,” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 14 (1): 99‐122.

Berg, L. D. and R. A. Kearns. 1998. “America Unlimited,” Environment and Planning D: Society & Space 16: 128‐132.
Berg , L. D. and J. R. Mansvelt. 2000. “Writing In, Speaking Out: Communicating Qualitative Research Findings,” in Q

Methods in Human Geography, I. Hay, ed., Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 161‐182.

Berg, L. D. and M. M. Roche. 1997. “Market Metaphors, Neo‐liberalism and the Construction of Academic Landscape

Zealand,” Journal of Geography in Higher Education 21(2): 147‐161.

Billson, J. M. 1991. “The Progressive Verification Method: Toward a Feminist Methodology for Studying Women Cro

Women’s Studies International Forum 14: 201‐215.

Bogdan R. and M. Ksander. 1980. “Policy Data as a Social Process: a Qualitative Approach to Quantitative Data,” Hum

39(4): 302‐308.

Bogdan, R. and S. K. Biklen. 1998. Chapter 2, Qualitative Research for Education 3rd edition, New York: Allyn and Bac

Bogdewic, S. 1999. “Participant Observation,” in Doing Qualitative Research, B. Crabtree and W. Miller eds., Newbu

Publications, 47‐69.

Bondi, L. 1993. “Locating Identity Politics,” in Place and the Politics of Identity, M. Keith and S. Pile, eds., London: RoBondi, L. 1997. “In Whose Words? On Gender Identities, Knowledge and Writing Practices,” Transactions of the Insti

Geographers NS 22: 245‐258.

Boyle, J. S. 1994. “Styles of Ethnography,” in Critical Issues in Qualitative Research Methods, J.M. Morse, ed., Thousa

and New Delhi: Sage, 159‐185.

Bradshaw, M. and E. Stratford. 2000. “Qualitative Design and Rigour,” in Qualitative Research Methods in Human Ge

Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Brown, E. B. 1992. “’What Has Happened Here’: The Politics of Difference in Women’s History and Feminist Politics,” 

295‐311.

Burgess, R. G. 1993. “Methods of Field Research 1: Participant Observation,” in In the Field: An Introduction to Field 

Routledge.
Butz, D. and L. D. Berg. 2002. “Paradoxical Space: Geography, Men and Duppy Feminism,” in Feminist Geography in 

and Methods, P. Moss, ed., Oxford: Blackwell, 87‐102.

Cameron, J. 2000. “Focussing in the Focus Group,” in Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography, I. Hay, 

Oxford University Press.

Cancian, F. M. 1993. “Conflicts Between Activist Research and Academic Success: Participatory Research and Alterna

American Sociologist 24(1): 92‐106.

Ceglowski, D. 1997. “That’s a Good Story, But Is It Really Research?” Qualitative Inquiry 3(2): 188‐199.

Cheng, S. A. 2001. “Weaving Intimacy and Reflexivity: The Locational Politics of Power, Knowledge, and Identities,” i

of the Subject: Landscapes, Ethnoscapes, and Theoryscapes, G. Currie and C. Rothenberg, eds., Lanham and B

Books, 181‐200.

Clifford, J. 1990 “Notes on (Field)notes,” in Fieldnotes. The Makings of Anthropology, R. Sanjek, ed., Ithaca, NY: Corn

Clifford, J. and G. E. Marcus, eds. 1986. Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley: University 

Cope, M. 2005. “Coding Qualitative Data,” In Qualitative Research Methods for Human Geographers, 2nd Edition, Iain 

University Press, 310‐324.

Cope, M. 2003. “Coding Qualitative Data,” In Key Methods in Human and Physical Geography, N. Clifford and G. Vale

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 445‐459.

Cope, M. 2002. “Feminist Epistemology in Geography,” In Feminist Geography in Practice: Research and Methods, P

MA: Blackwell Publishers, 43‐56.

Cormode L. and A. Hughes. 1999. “The Economic Geographer as a Situated Researcher of Elites,” Geoforum 30(4): 2

Cornelius, W. A. 1981. “Interviewing Undocumented Immigrants: Methodological Reflections Based on Fieldwork in 

United States,” Working Papers in U.S.‐Mexican Studies No. 2. University of California, San Diego: Program in 

Couto, R. A. 1987. “Participatory Research: Methodology and Critique,” Clinical Sociology Review 5: 83‐90.
Creswell, J. W. 1998. “Designing a Qualitative Study,” in Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design. Choosing Among th

W. Creswell, Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage Publications.

Creswell, J.W. 1998. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design. Choosing Among the Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks, C

Curtis, K. A. 1989. “Help from Within: Participatory Research in a Low‐Income Neighborhood,” Urban Anthropology 

Cupples, J. and S. Kindon. 2002. “Offstage Miracles: Returning to University and Writing ‘the Field,’” in Development 

Fieldwork: A Rough Guide, R. Scheyvans and D. Storey, eds., London: Sage.

De Soto, H. and N. Dudwick, eds. 2000. Fieldwork Dilemmas: Anthropologists in Postsocialists States. Madison: Unive

Press.

Del Casino, V., Jr., A. J. Grimes, Andrews, S.P. Hanna, and J. P. Jones, III. 2000. “Methodological Frameworks for the G

Organizations,” Geoforum 31: 523‐538.

Delgado‐Gaitan, C. 1993. “Researcher Change and Changing the Researcher,” Harvard Educational Review 63(4): 389

DeLyser, Dydia. 1999. “Authenticity on the Ground: Engaging the Past in a California Ghost Town,” Annals of the Ass

Geographers, 89(4): 602‐632.

DeLyser, D. 2001. “‘Do You Really Live Here? Thoughts on Insider Research,” Geographical Review, 91(1‐2): 441‐453

DeLyser, D. and P. Starrs, eds. 2001. Special Issue on “Doing Fieldwork,” The Geographical Review 91(1‐2).

Denzin, N. K. and Y. S. Lincoln, Eds. 2000. Handbook of Qualitative Research 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage PublDerrida, J. 1996. Archive Fever: A Freudian Impression. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

DeVault, M. 1999. Liberating Method: Feminism and Social Research. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Dowler, L. 2001. “The Four Square Laundry: Participant Observation in a War Zone,” The Geographical Review 91(1‐

Dowling, R. 2000. “Power, Subjectivity and Ethics in Qualitative Research,” in Qualitative Research Methods in Huma

ed., Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Dunaway, D. K. and W.K. Baum, eds. 1984. Oral History: An Interdisciplinary Anthology. Nashville: American Assocat

Local History.

Duncan, J. 1999. “Complicity and Resistance in the Colonial Archive: Some Issues of Method and Theory in Historica

Historical Geography 27: 119‐128.

Dunn, K. 2000. “Interviewing,” in Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography, I. Hay, ed., Melbourne: Oxfor

Dyck, I. 1993 “Ethnography: A feminist Method?” The Canadian Geographer 37: 52‐57.

Dyck, I. 1996. “Whose Body? Whose Voice?: Contradictory Cultural Constructions in the Research,” Atlantis 21(2): 5

Eisner, E. W. and A. Peshkin, eds. 1990. Qualitative Inquiry in Education: The Continuing Debate. New York: Teachers 

Elliott, S. J. 1999. “And the Question Shall Determine the Method,” The Professional Geographer (Focus: Qualitative 

Geography) 51: 240‐243.

Elwood, S. and D. Martin. 2000. “'Placing' Interviews: Location and Scales of Power in Qualitative Research,” Profess

52(4): 649‐657.

Emerson, R. M. 1988. "Introduction: Relational and Personal Processes in Fieldwork," in Contemporary Field Research: A 

Readings, R. M. Emerson, ed., 175‐89.

Emerson, R. M., R. I. Fretz, and L. L. Shaw. 1995. Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. Chicago and London: University of England, K. 1994. “Getting Personal: Reflexivity, Positionality, and Feminist Research,” Professional Geographer 46(1

Ettlinger, N. 2004. "Towards a Critical Theory of Untidy Geographies: The Spatiality of Emotions in Consumption and 

Feminist Economics 10(3): 21‐54.

Eyles, J, ed. 1988. Research in Human Geography: Introductions and Investigations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Eyles, J. 1993. “Feminist and Interpretive Method: How Different?” The Canadian Geographer 37(1): 50‐52.

Eyles, J. 1993. “Life History as Method,” The Canadian Geographer 37: 104‐119.

Eyles, J. and S. Smith. 1988. Qualitative Methods in Human Geography. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Fals‐Borda, O. 1987. “The Application of Participatory Action Research in Latin America,” International Journal of Soc

Farrow, H.; Moss, P. and B. Shaw. 1995. “Symposium on Feminist Participatory Research,” Antipode 27: 71‐74.

Feagin, J., A. Orum, et al. 1991. A Case for the Case Study. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

Findlay, A. M. and F. L. N. Li. 1997. “An Auto‐Biographical Approach to Understanding Migration: The Case of Hong K

29(1): 34‐44.

Flowerdew, R. and D. Martin, eds. 1997. Methods in Human Geography: A Guide for Students Doing Research Projec

Wesley Longman.

Fonow, M. M. and J.A. Cook, eds. 1991. Beyond Methodology: Feminist Scholarship as Lived Research. Bloomington: 

Press.

Forbes, D. 2000. “Reading Texts and Writing Geography,” in Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography, I. H

Oxford University Press.

Gade, D. 2001. “Intercultural Communication and Reflexive Consciousness in Geographic Fieldwork.,” The Geograph

370‐379.

Garvin, T. and K. Wilson. 1999. “The Use of Storytelling for Understanding Women's Desires to Tan: Lessons from th

Professional Geographer 51(2): 296‐306.

Geertz, C. 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.

Gibson‐Graham, J.‐K. 1994. “’Stuffed if I Know!’: Reflections on Post‐Modern Feminist Social Research,” Gender, Pla

224.

Gluck, S. B. and D. Patai, eds. 1991. Women's Words: The Feminist Practice of Oral History. New York: Routledge.Gordon, D. A. 1993. “The Unhappy Relationship of Feminism and Postmodernism in Anthropology,” Anthropological 

118.

Gorelick, S. 1991. “Contradictions of Feminist Methodology,” Gender and Society 5: 459‐477.
Goss, J. D. and T. R. Leinbach. 1996. “Focus Groups as Alternative Research Practice: Experience with Transmigran

Area 28: 115‐123.

Graham, E. 1999. “Breaking Out: The Opportunities and Challenges of Multi‐Method Research in Population Geogra

Geographer 51: 76‐89.

Guba, E. G. and Y. S. Lincoln. 1994. “Competing Paradigms in Qualitative Research.,” in Handbook of Qualititative 

Lincoln, ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 105‐117.

Gupta, A. and J. Ferguson. 1997. “Discipline and Practice: ‘The Field’ as Site, Method, and Location in Anthropology,” 

Locations: Boundaries and Grounds in a Field Science. A. Gupta and J. Ferguson, eds. Berkeley, Los Angeles, a

University of California Press, 1‐46.

Hall, B. L. 1992. “From Margins to Center? The Development and Purpose of Participatory Research,” American Soci

Harding, S., ed. 1987. Feminism and Methodology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Hartfield, M. and S. Kindon. “Participatory Heritage Assessment: an Example from Wellington, Aotearoa/New Zealan

Notes, (under review).

Hay, I., ed. 2000. Qualitative Rsearch Methods in Human Geography. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

Herbert, S. 2000. “For Ethnography,” Progress in Human Geography 24(4): 550‐568.Herod, A. 1993. “Gender Issues in the Use of Interviewing as a Research Method,” Professional Geographer 45(3): 30

Herod, A. 1999. “Reflections on Interviewing Foreign Elites: Praxis, Positionality, Validity and the Cult of the Insider,” 

313‐327.

Hertz, R. 1997. Reflexivity and Voice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Hodgson, D. 1999. “Critical Interventions: Dilemmas of Accountability in Contemporary Ethnographic Research,” Ide

224.

Hondagneu‐Sotelo, P. 1988. “Gender and Fieldwork,” Women’s Studies International Forum 11: 611‐618.
Hudson, A. (1998). “Placing Trust, Trusting Place: On the Social Construction of Offshore Financial Centers,” Political 

915‐937.

Hyams, M. 2000. " 'Pay attention in class...[and] don't get pregnant': a discourse of academic success among adolescEnvironment & Planning A, 32(4): 635‐654.Hyams, M. 2002. " 'Over there' and 'back then': an odyssey in national subjectivity." Environment & Planning D: Soci

459‐476.Hyams, M. 2003. "Adolescent Latina bodyspaces: making homegirls, homebodies and homeplaces." Antipode. 35(3)

Hyams, M. 2004. "Hearing girls' silences: thoughts on the politics and practices of a feminist method of group discus

and Culture. 11 (1):105‐119.Hyams, M. 2004. "Adolescent Latina bodyspaces: making homegirls, homebodies and homeplaces." In C. Katz, S. MaMitchell (eds.) Life's Work: Geographies of Social Production, Oxford: Blackwell.

International Institute for Qualitative Research, University of Alberta. Accessed at http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm

International Journal of Qualitative Methods, University of Alberta. Accessed at:

http://www.ualberta.ca/~ijqm/english/engframeset.html

Jackson, B. 1987. Fieldwork. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

Jackson, P. 1985. “Urban Ethnography,” Progress in Human Geography 9: 157‐176.

Jackson, P. and B. Holbrook. 1995. “Multiple Meanings: Shopping and the Cultural Politics of Identity,” Environment 

1913‐1930.

Jackson, P. 1999. “Review Symposium ‐ Postmodern Urbanism and the Ethnographic Void,” Urban Geography 20(5)

Jacobs, J. M. 1993. “The City Unbound: Qualitative Approaches to the City,” Urban Studies 30(4‐5): 827‐848.

Järvinen, M. 2000. “The Biographical Illusion: Constructing Meaning in Qualitative Interviews,” Qualitative Inquiry 6(
Jessor, R. Colby, A., and R.A. Shweder, eds. 1996. Ethnography and Human Development: Context and Meaning in So

D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Mental Health and Development. Chicago and London: 

Press.

Jones III, J. P., H. J. Nast, and S. M. Roberts, eds. 1997. Thresholds in Feminist Geography: Difference, Methodology, R

Lanham, MD and Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield.

Katz, C. 1992. “All the World Is Staged: Intellectuals and the Projects of Ethnography,” Environment and Planning D: 

10.5: 495‐510.

Kearns, R. 2000. “Being There: Research Through Observing and Participating,” in Qualitative Research Methods in H

Hay, ed., Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Kearns, R. A. and L. D. Berg. 2002. “Proclaiming Place: Towards a Geography of Place Name Pronunciation,” Social & 

(accepted April 9/02).

Kearns, R. A. 1991. “Talking and Listening: Avenues to Geographical Understanding,” New Zealand Journal of Geogra

Keith, M. 1992. “Angry Writing: (Re)presenting the Unethical World of the Ethnographer,” Environment and Plannin

Space 10: 550‐568.

Kesby, M., S. Kindon and R. Pain. 2003. “Participatory Approaches,” in Research Methods in Human Geography A Gu

Doing Research Projects, R. Flowerdew and D. Martin, eds., Harlow: Longman.

Kindon, S.L. 1995. “Dynamics of Difference: Exploring Empowerment Methodologies with Women and Men in Bali,” 

Geographer 51(11): 10‐12.

Kindon, S.L., and R. Slocum. 1995. “Gender Myths in Bali,” in Power, Process and Participation: Tools for Environmen

Change, D. Rocheleau, R. Slocum and B. Thomas‐Slayter, eds., London: Intermediate Technology Publications

Kindon, S.L. 1998. “Of Mothers and Men: Questioning Gender and Community Myths in Bali.,” in The Myth of Comm

in Participatory Development. I. Guijt and M. Shar, ed.,. London: Intermediate Technology Publications, 152‐

Kindon, S.L. and G. Hume‐Cook. 1998. “Deconstructive Geographic Fieldwork: Dimensions of Theoria and Praxis in ‘P

Identity,’ in Proceedings of the Geographic Education Conference 1997, E. Bliss, ed., Hamilton: University of W
Kindon, S. 2000. “(Re)framing and (Re)presenting: Participatory Community Video in Geographic Research,” in Proce

New Zealand Geography Conference, July 5‐8, 1999, M. Roche, M. McKenna and P. Hesp, eds., Palmerston: M

175‐178.

Kindon, S. and A. Latham. 2002. “From Mitigation to Negotiation: Ethics and the Geographic Imagination in Aotearo

Zealand Geographer, 58(1).

Kindon, S. and J. Cupples. 2002. “‘Anything to Declare?’: The Politics of Leaving ‘the Field,’” in Development Studies a

Rough Guide, R. Scheyvans and D. Storey, eds., London: Sage.

Kindon, S. “Participatory Video in Geographic Research: A Feminist Practice of Looking?” submitted to Area, (under 

Kirby, S. and K. McKenna. 1989. Experience, Research, Social Change: Methods From the Margins. Toronto: Garamon

Kirsh, G. E. 1999. Ethical Dilemmas in Feminist Research. Albany: State University of New York Press.Kitchin, R. and N. Tate. 1999. Conducting Research into Human Geography: Theory, Methodology, and Practice. Lond

http://www.may.ie/staff/rkitchin/books/research/resbook.htm

Kitchin, R. and N. Tate. 2000. Conducting Research in Human Geography: Theory, Methodology and Practice. Harlow

Kobayashi, A. 1994. “Coloring the Field: Gender, ‘Race,’ and the Politics of Fieldwork,” Professional Geographer 46(1Kobayashi, A. 2001. “Negotiating the Personal and the Political in Critical Qualitative Research,” in Qualitative Metho

Geographers: Issues and Debates, M. Limb and C. Dwyer, eds., London and New York: Arnold and Oxford Un

Kurtz, M. 2001. “Situation Practices: The Archive and the File Cabinet.” Historical Geography 29: 26‐37.

Kvale, S. 1996. InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. Thousand Oaks, London, and New DLal, J. 1996. “Situating Locations: The Politics of Self, Identity, and ‘Other’ in Living and Writing the Text,” Feminist D

Diane Wolf, ed. Boulder: Westview Press, 185‐214.

Lancaster, R. 1992. Life is Hard: Machismo, Danger, and the Intimacy of Power in Nicaragua. Berkeley, CA: University 
Lawson, V. 1995. “The Politics of Difference: Examining the Quantitative/Qualitative Dualism in Post‐Structuralist Fe

Professional Geographer 47(4): 449‐457.

Lazreg, M. 1988. “Feminism and Difference: The Perils of Writing as a Woman on Women in Algeria.” Feminist Studi

Lees, L. and L. D. Berg. 1995. “Ponga, Glass, and Concrete: A Vision for Urban Socio‐Cultural Geography in Aotearoa/

Zealand Geographer 51(2): 32‐41.

Lewin, E. and W. Leap. 1996. Out in the Field: Reflections of Lesbian and Gay Anthropologists. Urbana, IL: University 

Limb, M. and C. Dwyer, eds. 2001. Qualitative Methodologies for Geographers: Issues and Debates. London: Arnold 

Lofland, J. and L. Lofland. 1995. Writing Reports. Analyzing Social Settings. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 138‐152.

Martin, B. and C. T. Mohanty. 1986. “Feminist Politics: What’s Home Got to Do with It?” Feminist Studies/Critical Stu

Lauretis, ed. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Mattingly, D. and K. Falconer‐Al‐Hindi. 1995. “Should Women Count? The Context of the Debate,” Professional Geog

335.

McClean, R., L. D. Berg and M. M. Roche. 1997. “Responsible Geographies: Co‐creating Knowledges in Aotearoa,” Ne

Geographer 53 (2): 9‐ 

McDowell, L. 1992. “Multiple Voices,” Antipode 24(1): 56‐72.

McDowell, L. 1992. “Doing Gender: Feminism, Feminists and Research Methods in Human Geography,” Transactions 

British Geographers N.S. 17(4): 399‐416.

McDowell, L. 1998. “Elites in the City of London: Some Methodological Considerations,” Environment and Planning A 

McDowell, L. 2001. “Working with Young White Men: Place, Power and Ethnics in Research Practice,” The Geograph

201‐214.

McKendrick, J. H. 1999. “Multi‐method Research: An Introduction to its Application in Population Geography,” The P

Geographer (Focus: Multi‐method Research in Population Geography) 51(1): 40‐50.
McLafferty, S. L. 1995. “Counting for Women,” Professional Geographer 47(4): 436‐442.

Miles, M. and J. Crush. 1993. “Personal Narratives as Interactive Texts: Collecting and Interpreting Migrant Life‐Histo

Geographer 45(1): 84‐94.

Miller, N. K. 1991. Getting Personal. New York: Routledge.

Mitchell, W. J. T. 1994. Picture Theory: Essays on Verbal and Visual Representation. Chicago: University of Chicago P

Morgan, D. L., ed. 1994. Successful Focus Groups. London: Sage Publications.

Morgan, D. L.. 1997. Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. 2nd ed. Qualitative Research Methods Series 16. Thous

Publications.

Morin, K. M. and L. D. Berg. 1999. “Emplacing current trends in feminist historical geography,” Gender, Place and Cu

Morin, K. M. and L. D. Berg. 2001. “Gendering Resistance: British Colonial Narratives of Wartime New Zealand,” The 

Geography 27(2): 196‐222.

Morse, J. M., ed. 1994. Critical Issues in Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, London, and New Delhi: Sag

Moss, P. 1993. “Focus: Feminism as Method,” The Canadian Geographer 37(1): 48‐9.Moss, P. 1995. “Embeddedness in Practice, Numbers in Context: The Politics of Knowing and Doing,” Professional Ge

449.

Moss, P. 1995. “Reflections on the ‘Gap’ as Part of the Politics of Research Design,” Antipode 27: 82‐90.

Moss, P., ed. 2001. Placing Autobiography in Geography: History Method, and Analysis. Syracuse: Syracuse Universit

Moss, P., ed. (2002) Feminist Geography in Practice. London: Blackwell.

Mountz, A. 2002. “Feminist Politics, Immigration, and Academic Identities,” Gender, Place and Culture 9(2):187‐194.

Mountz, Alison; Ines Miyares, Richard Wright, and Adrian Bailey. 2003. “Methodologically Becoming: Power, Knowle

Team Field Research” Gender, Place, and Culture, 10 (1) 29‐46.
Mullings, B. 1999. “Insider or Outsider, Both or Neither: Some Dilemmas of Interviewing in a Cross‐cultural Setting,” 

337‐350.

Nagar, R. 1997. “Exploring Methodological Borderlands Through Oral Narratives,” in Thresholds in Feminist Geograp

Nast, and S. M. Roberts, eds., Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, 203‐224.

Nagar, R. 2002. “Footloose Researchers, 'Traveling' Theories, and the Politics of Transnational Feminist Praxis,” Gend

9(2):179‐186.

Nagar, R. and S. Geiger (under review). “Reflexivity, Positionality, and Identity in Feminist Fieldwork: Beyond the Imp

Narayan, K. 1997 [1993]. “How Native Is a ‘Native’ Anthropologist?” Situated Lives: Gender and Culture in Everyday L

Ragone, and P. Zavella, eds., New York and London: Routledge, 23‐41.

Nast, H. 1994. “Opening Remarks on 'Women in the Field,’” Professional Geographer 46(1): 54‐66.

Nast, H. J. 1998. “The Body as ‘Place’: Reflexivity and Fieldwork in Kano, Nigeria,” in Places Through the Body. H. J. N

London: Routledge, 93‐116.

Nast, H. 2000. “Research Performances,” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 18 (5): 639‐651.

Nielsen, J. M., ed. 1990. Feminist Research Methods: Exemplary Readings in the Social Sciences. Boulder: Westview P

Oinas, P. 1999. “Voices and Silences: the Problem of Access to Embeddedness,” Geoforum 30(4): 351‐361.Parr, H. 2001. “Feeling, Reading, and Making Bodies in Space,” Geographical Review 91(1‐2): 158‐167.

Patai, D. 1991. “US Academics and Third World Women: Is Ethnical Research Possible?” in Women's Worlds: The Fem

History, D. Patai ed., New York, NY: Routledge, 137‐153.

Patten, M. L. 2002. Understanding Research Methods: An Overview of the Essentials 3rd edition. Los Angeles, CA: Prycza

Plath, D. W. 1990. “Fieldnotes, Filed Notes, and the Conferring of Note,” in Fieldnotes. The Makings of Anthropolog

Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Peace, R. 2000. “Computers, Qualitative Data and Qualitative Research,” in Qualitative Research Methods in Human 

ed., Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Perkins, D. D. and A. Wandersman. 1990. “’You’ll Have to Work to Overcome Our Suspicions’: The Benefits and Pitfa

Community Organizations,” Social Policy 21(1): 32‐41.

Personal Narratives Group, ed. 1989. Interpreting Women’s Lives: Feminist Theory and Personal Narratives. Bloomin

University Press.

Philip, L. J. 1998. “Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches to Social Research in Human Geography ‐ an 

Environment and Planning A 30: 261‐276.

Pile, S. 1991. “Practising Interpretive Geography.” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 16: 458‐469.

Pratt, G. 1989. “Quantitative Techniques and Humanistic‐Historical Materialist Perspectives,” in Revitalizing Human 

Kobayashi and S. MacKenzie, eds., Boston: Unwin Hyman, 101‐115.

Pratt, G. 2000. “Studying Immigrants in Focus Groups,” RIIM Working Paper 00‐18. Vancouver.Pratt, G. 2002. “Collaborating Across Our Differences,” Gender, Place and Culture 9(2):195‐200.Proctor, J. D. and D. M. Smith, eds. 1999. Geography and Ethics: Journeys in a Moral Terrain. London and New York: Qualitative Report, The. 2002. An on‐line journal dedicated to qualitative

research since 1990. Accessed at: http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/web.html

Qualitative Research. Sage journal. Accessed at: http://www.sagepub.co.uk/frame.html?http://www.sagepub.co

s/j0331.html

Rabinow, P. 1977. Reflections on Fieldwork in Morocco. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Raju, S. 2002. “We are Different, But Can We Talk?” Gender, Place and Culture 9(2):173‐177.Reinharz, S. 1984. “The Stress of Detached Fieldwork,” in On Becoming a Social Scientist. New Brunswick, NJ and Lon

195‐239.

Reinharz, S. 1992. Feminist Methods in the Social Sciences. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Reinharz, S. 1997. “Who am I? The Need for a Variety of Selves in the Field,” in Reflexivity and Voice, R. Hertz, ed., T
Sage Publications, 3‐20.

Renzetti, C. M. and R. Lee. 1993. Researching Sensitive Topics. A Sage Focus Edition. Newbury Park, London, New De

Robinson, G. 1998. Methods and Techniques in Human Geography. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.

Robinson, J. 1994. “White Women Researching/Representing ‘Others’: From Antiapartheid to Postcolonialism?” in W

Space: Colonial and Postcolonial Geographies. A. Blunt and G. Rose, eds. New York and London: Guilford Pres

Rose, D. 1993. “On Feminism, Method, and Methods in Human Geography,” Canadian Geographer 37(1): 57‐61.

Rose, D. 2002. Revisiting Feminist Research Methodologies: A Working Paper. Ottawa: Status of Women Canada.

http://www.swc‐cfc.gc.ca/publish/research/drose/020703‐drose‐index‐e.html

Rose, G. 1997. “Situating Knowledges: Positionality, Reflexivity and Other Tactics,” Progress in Human Geography 21Rose, G. 1997. “Performing Inoperative Community,” Place and the Politics of Resistance. S. Pile, ed. London: RoutleRose, G. 2000. “Practising Photography: An Archive, a Study, Some Photographs and a Researcher,” Journal of Histor

26(4): 555‐571.

Rose, G. 2001. Visual Methodologies An Introduction to Interpreting Visual Materials. London: Sage Publications.

Rowe, S. and J. Wolch. 1990. “Social Networks in Time and Space: Homeless Women in Skid Row, Los Angeles,” Ann

of American Geographers 80(2): 184‐204.

Rowles, G. D. 1978. “Reflections on Experimental Field Work.,” in Humanistic Geography: Prospects and Problems. D

Samuels, eds., Chicago: Maaroufa Press, 173‐193. s/j0331.html

Sabot, E. C. 1999. “Dr Jekyl, Mr H(i)de: the Contrasting Face of Elites at Interview,” Geoforum 30(4): 329‐335.

Sanders, R. 1990. “Integrating Race and Ethnicity into Geographic Gender Studies,” Professional Geographer 42: 228

Sanjek, R. 1990. Fieldnotes: the Making of Anthopology. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Sayer, A. 1997. “Realism and Geography,” in Reading Human Geography: The Poetics and Politics of Inquiry. Trevor B

Gregory, eds. London and New York: Arnold, 112‐124. Rptd. from Johnson, R. J., ed. 1985. The Future of Geo

Metheun, 159‐173.

Sayer, A. 1999 [1984]. Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach. 2nd ed. London and New York: Routledge.

Schein, R., ed. 2001. Special Issue on ‘Practicing Historical Geography.’ Historical Geography 29.

Scott, J. C. 1990. Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts. New Haven and London: Yale University 

Shaw, B. 1995. “Contradictions Between Action and Theory: Feminist Participatory Research in Goa, India,” Antipode 

Shea, C. 2000. “Don’t Talk to the Humans: The Crackdown on Social Science Research,” Lingua Franca 10(6).Sidaway, J. D. 1992. “In Other Worlds: On the Politics of Research by ‘First World’ Geographers in the ‘Third World,’” Siedman, I. E. 1991. Interviewing as Qualitative Research: a Guide for Researchers in Education and the Social Scienc

York: Teachers College Press.

Silvey, R. 2002. “Sweatshops and the Corporatization of the University,” Gender, Place and Culture 9(2):201‐207.

Smith, C. D. and W. Kornblum, eds. 1996. In the Field: Readings on the Field Research Experience. 2nd ed. Westport, 

Praeger.

Smith, D. E. 1993. Texts, Facts, and Femininity: Exploring the Relations of Ruling. New York and London: Routledge.Smith, N. and C. Katz. 1993. “Grounding Metaphor: Towards a Spatialized Politics,” in Place and the Politics of Identi

Pile, eds., London: Routledge, 67‐83.

Sparke, M. 1996. “Displacing the Field in Fieldwork: Masculinity, Metaphor and Space,” in BodySpace, N. Duncan, ed

Routledge, 212‐232.

Special Issue. 1993. “Feminism as Method,” Candian Geographer 37(1).

Special Issue. 1994. “Women in the Field,” Professional Geographer 46 (1).
Special Issue. 1996. “Focus Groups,” Area 28(2).

Special Issue. 1999. “Action Research,” Area 31(3).

Special issue. 1999. “Networks, Cultures and Elite Research: the Economic Geographer as Situated Researchers,” Ge

Hughes and L. Cormode, guest eds.

Spoonley, P. and L. D. Berg. 1997. “Refashioning Racism: Immigration, Multiculturalism and an Election Year,” New Z

53(2): 46‐50.

Stacey, J. 1988. “Can There Be a Feminist Ethnography?” Women's Studies International Forum 11(1): 21‐27.

Staeheli, L. A. and R. Nagar. 2002. “Feminists Talking Across Worlds,” Gender, Place and Culture 9(2):167‐172.

Staeheli, L. A. and R. Nagar. 2002 . Special Issue. Gender, Place and Culture 9(2).

Strauss, A. L. 1987. Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Strauss, A. L. 1987. “Introduction” and “Codes and Coding,” in Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists, A. Strauss

Cambridge University Press.

Strauss, A.L. 1987. “Memos and Memo Writing,” in Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists, A. Strauss, Cambridg

University Press.

Taylor, S and R. Bogdan. 1984. Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods: The Search for Meanings. New York, NY: W

Thompson, P. 1984. “History and Community,” in Oral History: An Interdisciplinary Anthropology. Nashville: America

State and Local History.

Till, K. 1999. “Staging the Past: Landscape Designs, Cultural Identity, and Erinnerungspolitik at Berlin's Neue Wache,” 

283.

Twine, F. W. and J. W. Warren, eds. 2000. Racing Research Researching Race: Methodological Dilemmas in Critical R

York and London: NYU Press.
Valentine, G. 1997. “Tell Me About...Using Interviews as a Research Methodology,” in Methods in Human Geograph

D. Martin, eds., Longman, Harlow.

Valentine, G. 1999. “Being seen and heard? The Ethical Complexities of Working with Children and Young People at 

Ethics, Place and Environment 2: 141‐115.

Valentine, G. 1999. “Doing Household Research: Interviewing Couples Together and Apart,” Area 31: 67‐74.

Valentine, G. 2002. “People Like Us: Negotiating Sameness and Difference in the Research Process,” in Feminist Geo

Research and Methods, P. Moss, ed., Oxford: Blackwell.

Valentine, G., R. Butler, and T. Skelton. 2001. “The Ethical and Methodological Complexities of Doing Research with 

People,” Ethics, Place and Environment 4(2): 119‐125.

Vandsemb, B. H. 1995. “The Place of Narrative in the Study of Third World Migration: the Case of Spontaneous Rura

Lanka,” Professional Geographer 47(4): 411‐425.

Veeck, G. 2001. “Really I Don't Speak Chinese to Every Korean I Meet: Linguistic and Cultural Fluency in East Asia,” T

Review 91(1‐2): 34‐40.

Visweswaran, K. 1994. Fictions of Feminist Ethnography. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.

Ward K.G. and M. Jones. 1999. “Researching Local Elites: Reflexivity, ‘Situatedness’ and Political‐temporal Contigenc

301‐312.

Watkins, J. F. 1999. “Life Course and Spatial Experience: A Personal Narrative Approach in Migration Studies,” in Mig

Restructuring in the United States: A Geographic Perspective. K. Pandit and S. D. Withers, eds., Lanham and B

Littlefield, 294‐312.

Werner, O. and G. M. Schoepfle. 1987. Foundations of Ethnography and Interviewing, Vol. 1.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Wilkinson, S. 1998. “Focus Groups in Feminist Research: Power, Interaction, and the Co‐construction of Meaning,” 

International Forum 21(1): 111‐125.
Winchester, H. P. M. 1996. “Ethical Issues in Interviewing as a Research Method in Human Geography,” Australian G

131.

Winchester, H. P. M. 2000, “Qualitative Research and Its Place in Geography,” in Qualitative Research Methods in Hu

Hay, ed., Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Wolcott, H. 1990. “On Seeking‐and Rejecting‐Validity in Qualitative Research,” in Qualitative Inquiry in Education: Th

E. W. Eisner & A. Peshkin, eds., New York: Teachers College Press, 121‐152.

Wolcott, H. 1994. Transforming Qualitative Data: Description, Analysis, and Interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage 

Wolf, D., ed. 1996. Feminist Dilemmas in Fieldwork. Boulder: Westview Press.

Wolf, M. 1992. A Thrice Told Tale: Feminism, Postmodernism and Ethnographic Responsibility. Stanford, CA: StanforZavella, P. 1993. “Gender and Power Reconstructing Latino Ethnography,” in Urban Anthropology and Studies of Cu

World Economic Development 22(3‐4) 231.

Zavella, P. 1997 [1993]. “Feminist Insider Dilemmas: Constructing Ethnic Identity with ‘Chicana’ Informants,” in Situa

and Culture in Everyday Life. Louise Lamphere, H. Ragone, and P. Zavella, eds., New York and London: Routle

Zinn, M. B. 1979. “Field Research in Minority Communities: Ethnical, Methodological and Political Observations by a

Problems 27(2): 209‐219.
BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS

"Logics of Inquiry" Core Course, CUNY CPSE Doctoral Program

MAINLY METHOD AND METHODOLOGY

Agar, M.H. 1986. Speaking of ethnography. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Ball, M.S. & Smith, G.W.H. 1992 . Analyzing visual data. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. 1994. Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. London: Sage.

Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. 1994. Handbook of qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Eisner, E.W. & Peshkin A. 1990. Qualitative inquiry in education: the continuing debate. NY: TC Press

Eisner, E.W. 1991. The enlightened eye: qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. New York

Eisner, E.W. 1993. Forms of understanding and the future of educational research. Educational Researcher 22 (7): 5‐Feldman, M. 1995 . Strategies For Interpreting Qualitative Data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Fetterman, D.M. 1989. Ethnography : step by step. Newbury Park, Calif. : Sage Publications.Fiske, DW and Schweder, RA 1986. Metatheory in social science: pluralisms and subjectivities. U of Chicago Press.

Goodwin, C.J. 1995. Research in psychology: methods and design. New York: Wiley.

Glaser, B.J. & Strauss, A. 1967. The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.

Glesne, C. & Peshkin, A. 1992. Becoming qualitative researchers.White Plains, N.Y. : Longman.

Guba, E.G., Ed. 1990. The paradigm dialogue. Beverly Hills: Sage
Gubrium, J.F. & Holstein, J.A. 1997. The New Language of Qualitative Method. New York: Oxford University Press.

Hammersley, M. 1992. What's wrong with ethnography? : methodological explorations. London & New York : RoutleHammersley, M. (Ed.), 1993. Social research: Philosophy, politics and practice. London: Sage.

Heshusius, L. & Ballard, K., Eds. 1996. From Positivism to Interpretivism and Beyond. New York: Teachers College Pre

Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. 1994. Qualitative data analysis : an expanded sourcebook, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks : SHustler, D., Cassidy, A., & Cuff, E.C. (Eds) 1986. Action research in classrooms and schools. Boston : Allen & Unwin.

Jayaratne, T. 1993. Quantitative methodology and feminist research. In M. Hammersley (Ed.), Social research: Philos

practice (pp. 109‐123). London: Sage.

Lather, P. 1991. Getting smart : feminist research and pedagogy with/in the postmodern. New York : Routledge.Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage

Manning, P.K. 1987. Semiotics and fieldwork. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Maykut, P., & Morehouse, R. 1994. Beginning qualitative research: A philosophic and practical guide. London: FalmeMischler, E.G. 1986. Research interviewing: context and narrative. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Nau, D. (1995, December). Mixing Methodologies: Can Bimodal Research be a Viable Post‐Positivist Tool? The Qualitserial], 2 (3), Available: http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR2‐3/nau.html

Patton, M. 1987. How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. London: Sage Publications.Potter, W.J. 1996. An Analysis of Thinking and Research about Qualitative Methods. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Psathas, G. 1995. Conversation analysis: The study of talk‐in‐interaction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Reason, P., & Rowan, J. (1981). Human inquiry: A sourcebook of new paradigm research. Chichester: John Wiley and 

Riessman, C. (1993) . Narrative analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications

Scheff, T. J. 1990. Microsociology : discourse, emotion, and social structure. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.

Silverman, D. 1993. Interpreting qualitative data: methods for analysing talk, text, and interaction. Thousand Oaks, C

Smith, J.A., Harre, R., & Van Langenhove, L. 1995. Rethinking methods in psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Spradley, J. 1980. Participant observation . New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers

Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. 1993. Basics of qualitative research. London: Sage.

Van Maanen, J. 1988 . Tales of the field. Chicago: University of Chicago PressWolcott, H.F. (1995). The Art of fieldwork. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press.

PHILOSOPHICAL AND THEORETICAL: Influential Perspectives

Bateson, G. 1972. Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine. Bateson, G. 1979. Mind and nature: A necessarBantam BooksBerger, P.L. & Luckmann, T. 1966. The Social Construction of Reality. New York, NY: Anchor Press.Bourdieu, P. 1990. The logic of practice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Bruner, J. 1990 . Acts of meaning . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Cole, M. 1996 . Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Derrida, J. 1976. Of Grammatology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Erickson, F. & Shultz, J. 1981. When is a Context? In J.L. Green & C. Wallat (eds.), Ethnography and Language in Educ

Ablex Publishing, Norwood, NJ, 147‐‐160.

Feyerabend, P.K. 1975. Against method. Outline of an anarchistic theory of knowledge. London: New Left Books.

Foucault, M. 1969. The Archeology of Knowledge. New York: Random House.

Freire, Paolo. 1973. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Seabury Press.Gadamer, H.G. 1975. Truth and method. New York: Seabury Press.

Garfinkel, H. & Sacks, H. 1971. On formal structures of practical actions. In Theoretical Sociology, J.C. McKinnery & E

337‐366). New York: Appleton‐Century‐Crofts.

Geertz, C. 1973. The Interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books. Geertz, C. 1983. Local Knowledge. New York: 

Gergen, K.J. 1982. Towards transformation in social knowledge. New York: Springer‐Verlag.

Goffman, E. 1959. Presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Anchor Books. Goffman, E. 1967. Interaction ritua

Books.Halliday, M.A.K. 1978. Language as social semiotic. London: Arnold.

Harre, Rom. 1979. Social being : a theory for social psychology. Totowa, N.J. : Littlefield, Adams.

Hasan, R. 1984. Coherence and Cohesive Harmony. In J. Flood (ed.), Understanding Reading Comprehension, Interna

Association, Newark, DE, 181‐‐219.

Husserl, E. 1960. Cartesian Meditations: An Introduction to Phenomenology. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Hymes, D. 1972. Models of the interaction of language and social life. In J. Gumperz & D. Hymes, Eds., Directions in s

ethnography of communication. New York: .

Kendon, A. 1990. Conducting Interaction. Cambridge University Press, London.

Kuhn, T.S. 1970. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Latour, B. 1987. Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Leontiev, A.N. 1978. Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice‐Hall.

Levi‐Strauss, C. 1963. Structural Anthropology. New York: Basic Books.Merleau‐Ponty, M. 1945/1962. The Phenomenology of Perception. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Ochs, E. 1979. Transcription as Theory. In E. Ochs & B. Schiefflin (eds.), Developmental Pragmatics, Academic Press, 

Peirce, C.S. 1955. "Logic as Semiotic: The Theory of Signs" in J. Buchler, Ed., Philosophical Writings of Peirce. New YoPiaget, J. 1970. Structuralism. New York: Basic Books.

Ricoeur, P. 1976. Interpretation theory: Discourse and the surplus of meaning. Fort Worth: Texas Christian Universit

Ricoeur, P. 1981. What is a text? explanation and understanding. In J.B. Thompson (Ed.) Hermeneutics and the hum

164). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Sacks, H. [Jefferson, G. ed.] 1992. Lectures on Conversation. London: Blackwell.

de Saussure, F. 1959. Course in General Linguistics. New York: McGraw‐Hill.

Sinclair, J. & Coulthard, M. 1975. Towards an Analysis of Discourse, Oxford University Press, London.
Walkerdine, V. 1988. The Mastery of Reason. London: Routledge.

Whorf, B.L. 1956. Language, Thought, and Reality. [J.B. Carroll, ed.] Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

EXEMPLARY AND REPRESENTATIVE STUDIES

Atkinson, J. M., & Heritage, J. 1992. Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. New York: Cambridg

Bauman, R. & Sherzer, J. 1974. Explorations in the ethnography of speaking. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University P

Eckert, P. 1989. Jocks and Burnouts: Social Categories and Identity in the High School. New York: Teachers College P

Goodwin, C. & Goodwin, M. H. (1990). "Interstitial argument."� In Grimshaw, A. (Ed.), _Conflict talk: Sociolingui

arguments in conversations. New York: Cambridge University Press.Goodwin, M. H. (1993). Tactical uses of stories: Participation frameworks within boys' and girls' disputes. In Tannen, 

conversational interaction_ (pp. 165‐188). New York: Oxford University Press.

Heath, S.B. 1983. Ways with Words. London: Cambridge University Press.

Labov, W. 1972. Language in the Inner City. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

McLaren, Peter. 1985. Schooling as a Ritual Performance. Boston: Routledge.Packer, M.J. & Addison, R.B. (Eds.) (1989). Entering the circle: Hermeneutical research in psychology. New York: StatSacks, H., Schegloff, E. & Jefferson, G. 1974. A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn‐taking for Conversa

696 ‐ 735.

Walkerdine, V. (1989). Counting Girls Out. London: Virago.

Willis, P. 1981. Learning to Labor. New York: Columbia University Press.
OTHER WORKS OF INTEREST:

Methodological and theoretical

Bhaskar, R. (1997). The possibility of naturalism. A philosophical critique of the contemporary human sciences. Susse

Cazden, C. 1988. Classroom Discourse: The Language of Teaching and Learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Craig. A. (1988). On the method of analysing human transactions recorded on video. South African Journal of Psycho

Denzin, N.K. (1989). Interpretive Interactionism. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

Devlin, K. (1997). Goodbye Descartes. The end of logic and the search for a new cosmology of the mind. New York: J

Gooding D. (1990). Experiment and the making of meaning. Human agency in scientific observation and experiment

Academic Publishers.Green, J. & Bloome, D. (1997) . Ethnography and ethnographers of and in education: A situated perspective . In J. Flo

Capp (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Teaching Literacy through the Communicative and Visual Arts (pp. 181‐202) . 

Library ReferenceHeshusius, L. (1994) . Freeing ourselves from objectivity: Managing subjectivity or turning toward a participatory mo

. Educational Researcher, 23 15‐22Krieger, S. (1996) . Beyond subjectivity. In A. Lareau & J. Schultz (Eds.), Journeys through Ethnography (pp. 179‐194) 

Westview PressLinde, C. (1990) . Narrative as a resource for the social constitution of the selfBarbara Rogoff "Context and Cognitive Development" (1982) in Advances in Developmental Psychology edited by M

Brown.
Scheflen, A. 1975. Models and Epistemologies in the Study of Interaction. In A. Kendon, R.M. Harris & M.R. Key (eds

Behavior in Face‐to‐Face Interaction, Mouton, The Hague, The Netherlands.

Empirical studiesBateson, M. C. (1989) . Composing a life . New York: Atlantic Monthly Press

Bateson, M. C. (1994) . Peripheral visions . New York: Harper Collins

Belinky, M., Clinchy, B., Goldberger, N., & Tarule, J. (1986). Women's ways of knowing: The development of self, voi

York: Basic BooksDavidson, A. L. (1996) . Making and molding identity in schools: Student narratives on race, gender, and academic e

State University of New York Press

Goodwin, M. H. (1988). Cooperation and competition across girls' play activities. In A.D. Todd and S. Fisher, Eds., GeThe power of talk. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Goodwin, M. H. (1980). Directive/response speech sequences in girls' and boys' task activities. In S. McConnell‐Gine

Furman (Eds.) _Women and language in literature and society_ (pp. 157‐173). New York: Praeger.

Green, J. & Harker, J. (eds.). 1988. Multiple Perspective Analysis of Classroom Discourse. Ablex Publishing, Norwood

Heap, J. L. (1985). Discourse in the production of classroom knowledge: Reading lessons. Curriculum Inquiry, 15(3), 2

Bereiter, C. (1986). The reading comprehension lesson: A commentary on Heap's ethnomethodological analysis. Cur

16(1), 65‐72.

Heap, J. L. (1986). Cultural logic and schema theory: A reply to Bereiter. Curriculum Inquiry, 16(1), 73‐86.

Heap, J. L. (1990). Applied ethnomethodology: Looking for the local rationality of reading activities. Human Studies, 

(1984). Ethnomethodology and education: Possiblilities. The Journal of Educational Thought, 18(3), 168‐171.Klienman, S. (1996) . Opposing ambitions: Gender and equity in an alternative organization. Chicago: University of C
Librarian/Scholar: From Research Question to Results Saturday, July 11, 2009 | Chicago, IL.

Selected Bibliography on Qualitative Research DesignDr. Robert V. Labaree

University of Southern California

Introductory Survey TextsCreswell, John W. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1998.

This is a good introductory text to five key areas of qualitative research—narrative research, grounded theory, et

study, and phenomenology [an technique that focuses on people's subjective experiences and interpretations of tdescribes factors to consider in selecting the appropriate approach.Denzin, Norman K. and Yvonna S. Lincoln, eds. Handbook of Qualitative Research. First Edition. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1994.

This publication is now in its third edition [2005], but I find that the first edition remains the best at offering pract

essays on the essential theories, methods, and techniques of qualitative inquiry. The introductory chapter of the 

however, provides an excellent historical overview of the practice of qualitative research in the social and behavi

Flick, Uwe, Ernest von Kardoff, and Ines Steinke, eds. A Companion to Qualitative Research. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2004.A collection of essays covering a broad range of concepts, issues, and methods in qualitative research with a particu

As such, it offers a different perspective on a variety of topics. The essays are brief [no more than six pages] but they 

and can serve as a good introduction to a topic without being rooted too much in academic jargon.

Given, Lisa M., ed. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. 2 vols. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage Publications, 2008.

A useful source to consult that defines and explains core concepts, describes techniques involved in the implementa

qualitative research methods, and presents an overview of qualitative‐based approaches to research. Useful becaus

throughout the text are practical examples of applying qualitative methods to research problems in the social and b
Hatch, J. Amos. Doing Qualitative Research in Educational Settings. Albany, NY: State University of New

York, 2002.An accessible text that systematically describes the qualitative research process from deciding to do a qualitative stu

study, collecting data, analyzing data, and methods of reporting data— all framed by how to perform the research i

settings. The author takes a very practical approach to conducting a qualitative research study.

Merriam, Sharan B. and Associates. Qualitative Research in Practice: Examples for Discussion and Analysis.

San Francisco, CA: Jossey‐Bass, 2002.A basic textbook on qualitative research methods that stands out because it grounds each concept in an example. Coutlining an actual research study that applied qualitative methods and theories [e.g., an exploration of the relationvalues and adult learning] followed by the same authors reflecting upon some aspect of their research experience [e

collecting qualitative data in another culture].

2Strauss, Anslem and Juliet Corbin. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for

Developing Grounded Theory. 2 ed. Thousand Oaks, nd CA: Sage Publications, 1998.Another comprehensive, accessible textbook on qualitative research that takes the reader through various stages 

asking the research question, to gathering data, to coding the data, interpretation, and reporting. As the title sugg

framed within the context of Grounded Theory, best understood as an analytical approach by which theory emer

rather than the other way around.

Symon, Gillian and Catherine Cassell. Qualitative Methods and Analysis in Organizational Research.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1998.Since most library research takes place within an organizational context, this can be a useful introductory guide to u

application of qualitative methods within complex organizational settings. Each of the twelve chapters covers a part

approach. The long list of references at the end of each chapter lead to further readings on the topic. Needs a secon

bring organizational analysis into the 21st century.

Case StudiesBaxter, Pamela and Susan Jack. “Qualitative Case Study Method: Study Design and Implementation for

Novice Researchers.” The Qualitative Report 13 (December 2008): 544‐559.
As the title suggests, this is a good introductory essay that defines different types of case studies, factors involved in 

and key elements of study design and the reporting of findings. The table showing type, definition, and published st

particularly helpful.

Bennett, Andrew and Colin Elman. “Qualitative Research: Recent Developments in Case Study Methods.”

Annual Review of Political Science 9 (2006): 455‐476.

The use of case studies in qualitative inquiry is constantly evolving, particularly as qualitative inquiry becomes more 

social science disciplines. This essay gets a little too analytical for my tastes but the authors do a good job, neverthesharper focus to the use of qualitative case studies in academic research as well as describing their limitations.

Gomm, Roger, Martyn Hammersly, and Peter Foster, eds. Case Study Method: Key Issues, Key Texts.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2000.

A collection of essays from leading qualitative researchers on the topic of generalizability of case studies in social re

exploration of the underlying theocratical issues associated with their application. I found the essays on generalizab

insightful because this is an issue of concern in virtually all areas of qualitative inquiry.

Stake, Robert E. The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1995.This is an excellent, comprehensive text on designing qualitative case study research. Particularly useful to the novic

researcher, the book systematically details each step in designing a case study research, including determining the a

questions, data gathering techniques, analysis and interpretation of findings, and reporting of findings. For a briefer 

description, see Stake’s essay in the third edition of the Handbook of Qualitative Research [Sage, 2005].

VanWynberghe, Rob and Samia Khan. “Redefining Case Study.” International Journal of Qualitative

Methods 6 (June 2007): http://www.ualberta.ca/~ijqm/Understanding what a qualitative case study is has been a challenge for some time because no clear definition has e

thought this was a useful article for appreciating the challenges of defining case study as method and, by extension, 

in research.3Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research Design and Methods. Applied Social Research Methods Series, volume 5. 3 ed. Th

Sage Publications, 2003.
This is a commonly used text in social science methods classes on case study research design. It is a nice complimen

noted above because Yin goes into more detail about the specific elements of case study design and a number of ex

However, at the same time, I think this also renders it less accessible to beginning researchers. The chapter on “Prep

Collection” is quite helpful.

Content/Discourse AnalysisFairclough, Norman. Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge, 2003.

An accessible introduction to text and discourse analysis. Draws from a range of social theorists to present a form of 

with a consistently social perspective. The author relies on a variety of real texts, from political speeches and televis

management consultancy reports and texts concerning globalization, to illustrate key issues in discourse analysis. I fmost accessible text on the topic.

Gee, James Paul. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. 2nd ed. New York, Routledge: 2005.

This work introduces the field of discourse analysis and presents a unique, integrated approach to it. Assuming no plinguistics, the author presents both a theory of language‐in‐use and a method of research. Clearly structured and w

accessible style, this work demonstrates how language, both spoken and written, enacts social and cultural perspec

The author incorporates perspectives from a variety of approaches and disciplines, including applied linguistics, edu

anthropology and communication.

Grant, David, Tom Keenoy, and Cliff Oswick, eds. Discourse and Organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage PublicationsThis book analyzes the role of language and symbolic media in understanding of contemporary organizational issueschapter examines the role and growing importance of discourse in the study of organizations and critically evaluates 

various disciplines and defines organizational discourse as a subject area.Insch, Gary S., Jo Ellen Moore, and Lisa D. Murphy. “Content Analysis in Leadership Research: Examples, Procedures

Future Use.” Leadership Quarterly 8 (Spring 1997): 1‐25.

The authors outlines how content analysis can be used to study leadership, including a practical outline of procedur

authors incorrectly infer that content analysis can possess added validity because one can incorporate quantitative such as word counts, it remains a useful introduction to the technique.
Kohlbacher, Florian. “The Use of Qualitative Content Analysis in Case Study Research.” Forum: Qualitative Social Reshttp://www.qualitative‐research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/75This paper examines the application of qualitative content analysis as a method of interpretation method in case stu

introduction is given to qualitative content analysis as an interpretation method for qualitative interviews and other 

for understanding how content analysis can contribute to qualitative case study research.

Mayring, Philipp. “Qualitative Content Analysis.” Forum: Qualitative Social Research 1 (2000):

http://www.qualitative‐research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1089The author describes an approach of systematic, rule‐guided qualitative text analysis, including the central proced

content analysis, inductive development of categories, and deductive application of categories. The possibilities o

programs in supporting those qualitative steps of analysis are shown and the possibilities and limits of the approa4Morphew, Christopher C. and Matthew Hartley. “Mission Statements: A Thematic Analysis of Rhetoric Across Institu

of Higher Education 77 (May/June 2006): 456‐471.An interesting article that demonstrates the practical application of content analysis methods in educational researcmethod is used to study the production of mission statements in higher education institutions.White, Marilyn Domas and Emily E. Marsh. “Content Analysis: A Flexible Methodology.” Library Trends (Summer 20

The authors present a helpful introduction to the method and its application within the field of librarianship. This is 

essay because the discussion is placed within the context of library practice.

Data Collection, Management, and Analysis

Coffey, Amanda and Paul Atkinson. Making Sense of Qualitative Data: Complementary Research Strategies. Thousan

Publications, 1996.

A straightforward description of the post‐research gathering stage of analyzing and interpreting qualitative data. Th

useful for understanding how different methods generate their own particular form of data and, by extension, their 

of analysis and interpretation. The work also includes useful chapters on writing and reporting your data and emplo

computer‐aided data analysis.
McLellan, Elanor et al. “Beyond the Qualitative Interview: Data Preparation and Transcription.” Field Methods 15 (Fe

This essay discusses the need robust data collection techniques and the documentation of research procedures in q

particularly as it applies multi‐site studies. Outlines the consequences of inappropriate or inadequate preparation of 

recordings and offers practical considerations that can help researchers systematically organize and analyze textual Polkinghorne, Donald E. “Language and Meaning: Data Collection in Qualitative Research.” Journal of Counseling Psy

137‐145.A helpful article that provides an overview of using qualitative methods to gather data from interviews with particip

documents, and artifacts. The author describes the transformation of data into written text for analytic use and the 

interview participants and analytical issues such as awareness of the complexity of self‐reports and the relation betwlanguage expression. A useful look at the relationship between language and meaning and qualitative inquiry.

Ryan, Gery W. and H. Russell Bernard. “Techniques to Identify Themes.” Field Methods 15 (February 2003):85‐109.Theme identification is one of the most fundamental tasks in qualitative research but has received little attention in 

Therefore, this is an especially helpful overview of theme development and its relationship to various techniques co

dimensions: (1) appropriateness for data types, (2) required labor, (3) required expertise, (4) stage of analysis, (5) nu

themes to be generated, and (6) issues of reliability and validity. An important article that helps illuminate the proce

coding themes [patterns of data] in qualitative inquiry.

Wolcott, Harry F. “Writing Up Qualitative Research...Better.” Qualitative Health Research 12 (January 2002): 91‐103

The author presents his views for breaking from the traditional order of arranging research studies and the segregat

literature review, theory, and method—in favor of integrating these components into a report only as needed. He u

consider alternative ways of satisfying the intent of a literature review. Interesting argument presented stating that 

result when qualitative methodologists are free to present their findings in “discovery‐oriented ways.”

5Insider ResearchChavez, Christina. “Conceptualizing from the Inside: Advantages, Complications, and Demands on Insider PositionaliReport 13 (September 2008):
http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR13‐3/index.htmlThe author provides an overview of the debate on insider/outsider positionality and the methodological advantages between the two. The author present a new approach to training novice insider scholars that will help mediate betw

perspective and researcher position, particularly as it applies to studying underrepresented groups.

Edwards, Brian. “Deep Insider Research.” Qualitative Research Journal 2 (2002): 71‐84.This paper outlines the general advantages and disadvantages of what the author describes as “deep insider qualita

is defined by the author as insider research performed by individuals who have been a part of the organization they 

years. A useful essay for those who want to study an organization that they have [assumed] in‐depth knowledge of.Labaree, Robert V. “The Risk of ‘Going Observationalist’: Negotiating the Hidden Dilemmas of Being an Insider Partic

Qualitative Research 2 (April 2002): 97‐122.

My attempt to make sense of insider research for a course I took in my doctoral program and subsequently revised 

Sikes, Pat and Anthony Potts, eds. Researching Education from the Inside: Investigations from Within. New York: RouThis work focuses on research projects that are undertaken by people who already have an attachment to the institgroups on which their investigations are based [an issue of particular interest to the librarian/scholar]. The author sh

cases insider positioning is important because it provides access to the particular people and/or the phenomena. Ho

times, aspects of one’s own `insidership' will, in itself, come under scrutiny. Extremely useful for anyone thinking of academic setting.InterviewingFontana, Andrea and James H. Frey. “Interviewing: The Art of Science.” In Handbook of Qualitative

Research. 1 ed. Edited by Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln. (T st housand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994), pp. 361‐376

Like most essays in the first edition of the Handbook, the authors offer a pragmatic overview of concepts and metho

cluttered with dense abstractions or heavy language. This is a good introduction to the history, application, and vari

qualitative interviewing.Gubrium, Jaber F. and James A. Holstien, eds. Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method. Thousand Oak
A comprehensive handbook with numerous essays devoted exclusively to the research act of interviewing. Virtually 

interviewing are covered, with comprehensive footnoting that can lead you to additional sources of analysis. Illumin

there are numerous forms of interviewing in the social sciences.

Kvale, Steinar. InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1996.

Considered a standard text in the field of qualitative inquiry. Kavale covers all aspects of the interview process, inclu

interview in the larger research process, ethical concerns, data validity and reliability, and methods of analysis and i

text is readable and absent of a lot of jargon.

6Leech, Beth L. “Asking Questions: Techniques for Semistructured Interviews. PS: Political Science and Politics 35 (Dec

668.The nice thing about articles published in disciplines like political science where the research paradigm is dominated 

thinking is that, when a paper is written about a particular qualitative research method, it’s generally very practical 

defensive]. Here’s a case in point focused on a particular form of qualitative interviewing, the semi‐structured interv

contains other articles on this topic based on a symposium on interview methods.

Morgan, David L. Focus Group Kit, Volumes 1‐6. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998.The six volumes in this series cover all aspects of conducting focus group interviews. I don’t really like doing focus 

however, the series provides a readable approach to the design, implementation, and analysis of focus group datresource for anyone who wants to use focus groups as part of their research.

Hammer, Dean and Aaron Wildavsky. “The Open‐Ended, Semistructured Interview: An (Almost) Operational Guide.” 

Organization of Scholarly Work. Aaron Wildavsky. 2nd enlarged ed. (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 199

A useful essay that examines the provisional nature of semi‐structured interviewing and the underlying procedures type of qualitative method. There is a lot of useful discussion about the relationship between the researcher and the 

Life HistoriesCole, Ardra L. and J. Gary Knowles, eds. Lives in Context: The Art of Life History Research. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira 
This is the best text I have found so far that takes the novice researcher through each step of conducting a life histo

this work because it considers the process of conducting a life history study beyond simply interviewing but gives a 

perspective on the relationship between the research and the researched. This was the inspiration for....

Labaree, Robert V. “Encounters with the Library: Understanding Experience Using the Life History Method.” Library 

2006): 121‐139.My contribution to an issue of Library Trends devoted to research methods. A life history project is one of the most 

of qualitative inquiry there is, but it can illuminate ways of knowing that go much deeper than almost any other app

examine the experienced lives of others.

Literature ReviewArmitage, Andrew and Diane Keeble‐Allen. “Undertaking a Structured Literature Review or Structuring a Literature R

the Field.” The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods 6 (2008): http://www.ejbrm.com/vol6/v6‐i2/v6‐i2‐aThe author describes a systematic methodology for conducting a particular form of a literature review as it applies tresearch. I just found it to be a good read because it gives a detailed outline of a structured literature review.

Hart, Christopher. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination. Thousand Oaks, CA

This is a practical and comprehensive guide to researching, preparing, and writing a literature review. It’s not focuse

qualitative methods but does frame the process within the social and behavioral sciences. I just find it to be a really 

guide.7Mixed MethodsJohnson, R. Burke and Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie. “Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has CResearcher 33 (October 2004): 14‐26.

This article, among other things, provides a framework for designing and conducting mixed methods research. In so 

explain mixed methods research as following an eight‐step process. A key feature of mixed methods research is its mpluralism or eclecticism, which, the authors argue, frequently results in superior research. I think that really depend

problem, but they don’t spend a lot of time going over the deficiencies associated with this approach. Nevertheless, 

useful analysis of how mixed methods can be utilized in social science research.
Mason, Jennifer. “Mixed Methods in a Qualitatively Driven Way.” Qualitative Research 6 (February 2006):9‐25.

The author makes an argument for a ‘qualitatively driven’ approach to mixing methods by focusing on the value of m

approaches for researching questions about social and lived experiences. The author also argues that mixing metho

researcher to think creatively about the research process and to enhance and extend the logic of qualitative explanaconcludes with a discussion of qualitatively derived principles for mixing methods. I think this a useful essay that helmethods to the qualitative side of analysis.

Tashakkori, Abbas and Charles Teddle, eds. Handbook of Mixed Methods in the Social and Behavioral Research. T

Sage, 2003.Known as the third methodological movement in social research, this work discusses the strengths and weaknessdesigns, and provides an array of specific examples in a variety of disciplines. The book provides a comprehensive 

virtually all aspects of mixing qualitative and quantitative methods and how doing so can provide a more complet

research problems.ObservationAngrosino, Michael V. and Kimberly A. Mays de Perez. “Rethinking Observation: From Method to Context.” In HandbResearch. Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln. 2nd edition. (Thousand Oaksa, CA: Sage, 2000), pp. 673‐702.This chapter from the second edition of the Handbook is useful for its review of observation as a fundamental methand discusses the evolution of observation within qualitative inquiry. I found the chapter useful for its discussion of 

contextual interpretation of meaning, and the ethics of observation.

O’Toole, Paddy and Prisca Were. “Observing Places: Using Space and Material Culture in Qualitative Research.” Qua

(November 2008): 616‐634.

The author attempts to bring to light the notion of analyzing the place and material objects that contribute to the in

behavior of the participants in a particular setting. The article shows how an analysis of space and material culture cunderstanding of social and structural relationships in qualitative research. An interesting study of why it is importa

people interacting with people in qualitative observation studies, but their interaction with the material culture aro

8Validity and Reliability
Riege, Andreas M. “Validity and Reliability Tests in Case Study Research: A Literature Review with ‘Hands‐ On’ Applic

Research Phase.” Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 6 (2003):75‐86.This article reviews the literature to establish that the validity and reliability of qualitative data are important in ord

stability and quality of the data obtained. Although focused on the case study method in marketing research, the au

guidelines for achieving high validity and reliability for each phase in case study research.

Cho, Jeasik and Allen Trent. “Validity in Qualitative Research Revisited.” Qualitative Research 6 (2006):319‐340.

Useful discussion about the problem of validity in qualitative research and explore new ways of addressing researchlived experiences of respondents and the reality they describe. The footnotes are particularly helpful for discovering the topic.Selected JournalsAction Research, Sage, 2003‐.Discourse Studies, Sage, 1999‐.Ethnography, Sage, 2000‐.

Field Methods, Sage, 1989‐.Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, Sage, 1972‐.Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Sage, 2007‐.

Qualitative Health Research, Sage, 1991‐.

Qualitative Inquiry, Sage, 1995‐.

Qualitative Research, Sage, 2001‐.

Qualitative Research in Psychology, Taylor & Francis, 2004‐.

Qualitative Research in Sport and Exercise, Taylor & Francis, 2009‐.

Qualitative Research Reports in Communication, Taylor & Francis, 2000‐.

Qualitative Social Work, Sage, 2002‐.

Qualitative Sociology, Springer, 1978‐.

Studies in Qualitative Methodology, Elsevier, 1998‐. [book series]

The Qualitative Report [http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/]

Web DirectoryThe Qualitative Report Directory of Web Sites [http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/web.html]‐‐‐ this is a very comprehensite and a good place to start
Additional references noted in the focus group CyberSeminar

Analyzing and Reporting Focus Group Results (Focus Group Kit) and Moderating Focus Groups by Richard A. Krueg

publications.(There are several good books by Richard Krueger on focus groups.)

Crabtree and Miller, Doing Qualitative Research, Sage 1992

Greg Guest , Laura Johnson, How Many Interviews Are Enough? An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variab

Vol. 18, No. 1, 59‐82 (2006)

Margarete Sandelowski, Focus on Research Methods: Whatever Happened to

Qualitative Description? Research in Nursing & Health, 2000, 23, 334±340

Kuzel AJ. Sampling in qualitative inquiry. In Crabtree BF, Miller WL, editors. Doing qualitative research. Vol 3. New

1992.