H is for Human and How (Not) To Evaluate Qualitative Research in HCI

August 20, 2024 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› Human-Computer Interaction

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Andy Crabtree arXiv ID 2409.01302 Category cs.HC: Human-Computer Interaction Citations 16 Venue Human-Computer Interaction Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Concern has recently been expressed by HCI researchers as to the inappropriate treatment of qualitative studies through a positivistic mode of evaluation that places emphasis on metrics and measurement. This contrasts with the nature of qualitative research, which privileges interpretation and understanding over quantification. This paper explains the difference between positivism and interpretivism, the limits of quantification in human science, the distinctive contribution of qualitative research, and how quality assurance might be provided for in the absence of numbers via five basic criteria that reviewers may use to evaluate qualitative studies on their own terms.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Human-Computer Interaction

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted