A matter of taste: evaluating the quality of qualitative research.

Driven by an impetus to standardize, numerous checklists have been devised to address quality in qualitative research, but these standards and the mindset driving them offer no language with which to speak about taste, or the aesthetic sensibilities that play such a key role in evaluating the goodness of any object. In this article, quality appraisal in qualitative research is considered in the context of taste, that is, in the discernment involved in judging the value of research and in the recognition of the key role reviewer preferences, sensibilities and membership in one or more taste communities play in these judgements. The evaluation of a study is accomplished by evaluating one or more reports from that study, and such reports may be conceived as art forms amenable to the same criteria for appraisal as poems or paintings. Taste implies judgements about the quality of objects and a person's ability to sift through and select from a store of knowledge that knowledge appropriate to judge its value. What binds a community of practitioners (here reviewers of qualitative studies) together is taste-making, or the constant refinements of judgements concerning what constitutes good and bad practice.

[1]  P. Pluye,et al.  A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in Mixed Studies Reviews. , 2009, International journal of nursing studies.

[2]  Cate Watson.  The `impossible vanity': uses and abuses of empathy in qualitative inquiry , 2009 .

[3]  Rosaline S Barbour,et al.  Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[4]  R. Edwards,et al.  Interpreters/Translators and Cross-Language Research: Reflexivity and Border Crossings , 2002 .

[5]  S. Thorne.  Toward Methodological Emancipation in Applied Health Research , 2011, Qualitative health research.

[6]  Ray Pawson,et al.  Digging for Nuggets: How ‘Bad’ Research Can Yield ‘Good’ Evidence , 2006 .

[7]  M. Sandelowski,et al.  Reading Qualitative Studies , 2002 .

[8]  Lisa A Bero,et al.  "Developing good taste in evidence": facilitators of and hindrances to evidence-informed health policymaking in state government. , 2008, The Milbank quarterly.

[9]  Brynjulf Stige,et al.  Toward an Agenda for Evaluation of Qualitative Research , 2009, Qualitative health research.

[10]  Debbie Laliberte Rudman,et al.  Bridging Conceptions of Quality in Moments of Qualitative Research , 2013 .

[11]  Eric Mykhalovskiy,et al.  Reframing the evaluation of qualitative health research: reflections on a review of appraisal guidelines in the health sciences. , 2003, Journal of evaluation in clinical practice.

[12]  Patrick Onghena,et al.  Critical Appraisal of Mixed Methods Studies , 2013 .

[13]  Silvia Gherardi,et al.  Practice? It’s a Matter of Taste! , 2009 .

[14]  Karin Hannes,et al.  A Comparative Analysis of Three Online Appraisal Instruments’ Ability to Assess Validity in Qualitative Research , 2010, Qualitative health research.

[15]  J. Lee.  Genre-Appropriate Judgments of Qualitative Research , 2014 .

[16]  M Sandelowski,et al.  On the aesthetics of qualitative research. , 1995, Image--the journal of nursing scholarship.

[17]  S. Shapin.  Pump and Circumstance: Robert Boyle's Literary Technology , 1984 .

[18]  A. Strati.  Aesthetics in the Study of Organizational Life , 2008 .

[19]  P. Sainsbury,et al.  Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. , 2007, International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

[20]  Les Todres,et al.  Strategies for Disseminating Qualitative Research Findings: Three Exemplars , 2007 .

[21]  H. Korzilius,et al.  Methodological criteria for the internal validity and utility of practice oriented research , 2011 .

[22]  K. Boydell,et al.  The Production and Dissemination of Knowledge: A Scoping Review of Arts-Based Health Research , 2012 .

[23]  Ingrid Poulsen,et al.  Validation of a new assessment tool for qualitative research articles. , 2012, Journal of advanced nursing.

[24]  Melissa Freeman,et al.  The Hermeneutical Aesthetics of Thick Description , 2014 .

[25]  I. Woodward,et al.  From aesthetic principles to collective sentiments: The logics of everyday judgements of taste , 2001 .

[26]  E. Eisner.  Artistry in Education , 2003 .

[27]  G. Kuipers.  Television and taste hierarchy: the case of Dutch television comedy , 2006 .

[28]  H Roberts,et al.  Evidence, hierarchies, and typologies: horses for courses , 2003, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[29]  Sarah J. Tracy.  Qualitative Quality: Eight “Big-Tent” Criteria for Excellent Qualitative Research , 2010 .

[30]  D. White,et al.  Evaluating evidence and making judgements of study quality: Loss of evidence and risks to policy and practice decisions , 2001 .

[31]  M. Sandelowski,et al.  The good, the bad and the relative, Part one: Conceptions of goodness in qualitative research. , 1998, International journal of nursing practice.

[32]  Jonathan Bean,et al.  Taste Regimes and Market-Mediated Practice , 2013 .

[33]  Antoine Hennion,et al.  Those Things That Hold Us Together: Taste and Sociology , 2007 .

[34]  Mark Fenster.  The Problem of Taste within the Problematic of Culture. , 1991 .

[35]  M. Sandelowski,et al.  The good, the bad and the relative, Part Two: Goodness and the criterion problem in qualitative research. , 1999, International journal of nursing practice.

[36]  Eva Alisic,et al.  Making a difference: towards a method for weighing the evidence in a qualitative synthesis. , 2011, Journal of evaluation in clinical practice.

[37]  Susan Orr,et al.  We kind of try to merge our own experience with the objectivity of the criteria’: The role of connoisseurship and tacit practice in undergraduate fine art assessment , 2010 .

[38]  Considering the Connoisseur: Probing the Language of Taste , 2006 .

[39]  Karen Locke,et al.  Appealing Work: An Investigation of How Ethnographic Texts Convince , 1993 .

[40]  M. Ollivier,et al.  Taste and taste culture , 2001 .