qualitative secondary analysis in austere times: ethical, professional and methodological considerations

Clicks: 213
ID: 134193
2013
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #540 of 729 articles by views in molecules

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 729 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Recent debates in qualitative secondary analysis (QSA) have sought to move beyond polarising arguments in order to develop more nuanced perspectives on the epistemological, analytical and practical opportunities and challenges associated with its methods. This is generally to be welcomed, although there are also signs of unhelpful primary/secondary divisions finding new forms of expression. Focusing on definitional issues and wider contexts of QSA helps to explain the possible sources of ongoing tensions while affording tentative insights into potential opportunities and synergies across the primary/secondary spectrum. Building on work undertaken within the Timescapes Qualitative Longitudinal study, the article also highlights some under-examined costs and risks that may come along with new opportunities created by secondary analysis. Issues of over-privileging secondary analysis claims, making and the timing of qualitative secondary analysis are foregrounded as requiring further consideration if researchers are to take seriously lingering suspicions and fears about qualitative secondary analysis and not dismiss them as simply reactionary or self-serving. URN: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1301181
Reference Key
coltart2013forum:qualitative Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;Carrie Coltart;Karen Henwood;Fiona Shirani
Journal molecules
Year 2013
DOI
DOI not found
URL
http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1885
Keywords
epistemology

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.