4.4 Review

Is thematic analysis used well in health psychology? A critical review of published research, with recommendations for quality practice and reporting

期刊

HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/17437199.2022.2161594

关键词

coding; quality criteria; qualitative research; reflexivity; reporting standards; theme

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the dominance of the 'scientific psychology' paradigm, qualitative research in health psychology is growing. Thematic analysis (TA) is widely used but often poorly practiced. In this review of 100 papers reporting TA, we identified 10 common problematic areas and developed recommendations for authors, reviewers, and editors to improve practice and reporting quality. This article aims to facilitate better qualitative research and enhance the knowledge base of health psychology.
Despite the persistent dominance of a 'scientific psychology' paradigm in health psychology, the use of qualitative research continues to grow. Qualitative approaches are often based on fundamentally different values from (post)positivistempiricism, raising important considerations for quality, and whether qualitative work adheres to, and is judged by, appropriate publication standards. Thematic analysis (TA) has become a particularly popular method in qualitative health psychology, but poor practice is widespread. To support high quality, methodologically coherent TA practice and reporting, we critically reviewed 100 systematically selected papers reporting TA, published in five prominent health psychology journals. Our review assessed reported practice, and considered this in relation to methodological and quality recommendations. We identified 10 common areas of problematic practice in the reviewed papers, the majority citing reflexive TA. Considering the role of three 'arbiters of quality' in a peer review publication system - authors, reviewers, and editors - we developed 20 recommendations for authors, to support them in conducting and reporting high quality TA research, with associated questions for reviewers and editors to consider when evaluating TA manuscripts for publication. We end with considerations for facilitating better qualitative research, and enriching the understandings and knowledge base from which health psychology is practiced.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据