Corinn Randolph

Evaluating Research Articles: Qualitative Designs

Scale:

1
3
5

Poorly addressed
Partially addressed
Extremely well addressed

1. Do you think the research design used in this study was well suited for
addressing the type of question(s) being asked?
Rating:

Justification: The research design used in this study, a grounded theory

research design, was appropriate for the type of question being asked. The
questions that the participants answered allowed the researchers to collect and
analyze qualitative data so that an explanation is built from the experiences and
perspectives of participants. This study would be beneficial to anyone wanting
to understand a process or to know how to possibly influence the outcome of
the process for others by reading through the responses of the sixteen
participants.
2. Was the type of sampling used appropriate for the questions investigated and
the type of research design used?
Rating:

Justification: The sampling used was appropriate for the questions investigated
and the type of research design used. There was a great amount of detail given
in the study about how participants were chosen. These steps could easily be
followed by someone wishing to repeat the study. The recruitment section of
the study provided details about specific selection strategies used as well as the
size of the sample. There is evidence of purposeful sampling because the
researcher was very purposeful when selecting the participants of this study.
The final sixteen participants were best suited to answer the questions about
female leadership and positive community change. They were information rich
and were most appropriate for the study of the central phenomenon. While the
study started with attempting to include 20 participants, a total of 16 actually
participated. Although there are no strict guidelines for the number of
participants in a grounded theory study, the researchers could have started with
a larger number of participants (closer to 30) so that they completed the study
with the recommended 20-30 participants.

Corinn Randolph

3. Did the authors convince you that the type of analyses performed was an
appropriate approach to take?
Rating:

Justification: The authors did convince me, to an extent, that the type of
analyses performed was an appropriate approach to take but I felt some
important information was missing from the study. The major data collection of
this study was in the form of participant interviews. Conducting interviews
allowed the participants to describe detailed personal information and allowed
the researchers to collect data from many different locations in the United
States. Sixteen one-on-one interviews were conducted over a period of sixteen
months, four in person and 12 by telephone. Although the telephone interviews
were necessary in this case study, the researchers were unable to observe the
participants behaviors and facial expressions, which can limit the researchers
interpretations of a participants responses. The researcher includes in the
study how long each interview lasted but fails to mention who the
interviewer/interviewees were and where the interviews took place. The
researcher did state that they recorded the interviews, ensuring that they had an
accurate and detailed record of the interviews content. There was no mention
of field notes being taken at the time of the interviews.
There was discussion of using a computer program to code specific data as well
as analyzing data by hand that had been transcribed verbatim. The use of
transcribed recordings was clearly well suited for learning about the central
phenomenon with the selected participants. The authors of this study chose to
break down the analysis of the questions based on the type of response
therefore they mentioned coding of the questions pertaining to leadership,
motivation, defining success, and challenges. There is evidence that the coding
was an ongoing process during the analysis of the data with several additional
themes emerging as the analysis went on.

4. Do the researchers convince you that the study is credible, according to the
criteria below?

Do the researchers indicate their background, interests, and possible

biases?
Is there evidence of triangulation?
Were field notes collected?
Were multiple types of data and/or data sources used?
Was member checking employed?

Rating:

Corinn Randolph

Justification: In my opinion, credibility of this study is the weakest area

according to the above criteria. We are provided almost no information on the
background of the researchers being told only that one member of the research
team had expertise in qualitative research methods and that they were all
females. The authors do address ways in which they tried to minimize bias
stating that they attempted to adhere to the questioning route as strictly as
possible and also implemented the use of software so the data could be
examined more objectively. We do have a small mention at the back of the
study where we learn where the authors are employed. There is no evidence of
triangulation since the data was collected from only one group of specific
participants and only one type of data (one on one interviews). While they did
interview participants that held different positions in their organizations, these
positions were not diverse enough to provide different perspectives. The
authors themselves mention that the study could be strengthened by obtaining
feedback from staff and volunteers as well as the executive directors, founders,
and program directors. There is no mention of the collection of field notes during
the interviews. Multiple types of data and/or data sources were not used and
member checking was not employed.

5. Did the researchers convince you that their conclusions follow from their
data?
Rating:

Justification: While there is no doubt that the research done in this study was
valuable, I was left unsatisfied by the conclusions that they drew from their data.
Theyve confirmed the important role that female community leaders play in
improving public health but drew few concrete conclusions from their one on
one interviews. There was a wealth of information in the results section of this
study, as well as the breakdown of specific interviews, and I do believe a reader
that is research consumer savvy would be able to draw conclusions from the
data presented. The overall conclusions of the actual report were very broad
and did not provide detailed and in-depth answers to the studys research
question.
After the analysis of the leader interviews, many common themes emerged from
the data, which helped the researchers draw conclusions as to what specific
leadership characteristics and behaviors exist in women that have successfully
created change in their communities. Using quotes from each of the interviews
helped to show the reader specific examples of these characteristics as well as
to support what research has already proved in regards to this study. The
results from this study do suggest ways to train and nurture women leaders in
public health and have implications for the role of gender in leadership. The

Corinn Randolph

researchers provide follow up activities such as tools that need to be provided

for these women to experience success (fundraising and organizational growth).
They also touch on the importance of mentoring and how it was critical for the
success of the women in their study. After breaking down the themes from the
interviews, the authors do convince me of the conclusions theyve drawn from
the data thats been collected.