This is not an exhaustive list, but an evolving collection of the articles, books, and resources that we have found helpful over the years.
Introduction to Qualitative Research
Ethics in Qualitative Research
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA)
Qualitative Research in Trials
Moriarty J (2011) Qualitative methods overview. NIHR School for Social Care Research:
Link to PDF.
Ritchie J, Lewis J, McNaughton Nicholls C & Ormston (2014) Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. Los Angeles, Sage
Pope, C. & Mays, N. (2020) Qualitative Research in Health Care. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell
Lincoln, Y. & Guba, E. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry Thousand Oaks, CA, London and New Delhi, Sage.
Cresswell, J. W. 2016. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions, London, Sage publications Ltd.
A good place to start. An easily accessible text that considers and compares the philosophical underpinnings and key elements of five approaches to qualitative inquiry; narrative research, phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, and case study. (CL)
Harding, S. ed. 1987 Feminism and Methodology Bloomington, Indiana University Press (AS)
Crotty, Michael, author. The Foundations of Social Research : Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process. London; Thousand Oaks, Calif.:Sage Publications, 2003.
A clearly written exposition of the theoretical considerations of the research process. (VL)
Finlay, L. & Gough, B. 2003. Reflexivity: a practical guide for researchers in health and social science, Oxford, UK, Blackwell Publishing.
Barbara Probst, The Eye Regards Itself: Benefits and Challenges of Reflexivity in Qualitative Social Work Research, Social Work Research, Volume 39, Issue 1, March 2015, Pages 37–48, doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/svu028
Mays, N. & Pope, C. 1995. Qualitative research: Rigour and qualitative research. The British Medical Journal, 311.
Tong, A., Sainsbury, P. & Craig, J. 2007. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19, 349-357
This paper outlines a 32 item checklist for reporting interview and focus group studies. The checklist is a useful tool for critical appraisal, as well as a guide for reporting/writing up (CL).
Tong, A., Flemming, K., McInnes, E., Oliver, S. & Craig, J. 2012. Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research: ENTREQ. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 12, 181.
Miller, T., Birch, M., Mauthner, M., & Jessop, J. (2012) Ethics in Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications Ltd.
This is a useful book to help with thinking about ethical issues in a bit more depth, and covers a wide range of research types and scenarios. (CM)
Forbat, L. , and J.Henderson . 2005. Theoretical and practical reflections on sharing transcripts with participants. Qualitative Health Research 15:1114–28. (AS)
Pittaway E. Bartoloemi L., Hugman R. (2010) ‘Stop Stealing Our Stories’: The Ethics of Research with Vulnerable Groups. Journal of Human Rights Practice Vol 2 | Number 2 | June 2010 | pp. 229–251 DOI:10.1093/jhuman/huq004
Charmaz, C. (2017) Continuities, contradictions, and critical inquiry in Grounded Theory. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16, 1-8.
A superb overview of the defining features and variations in grounded theory. (VL)
Annells, M. 1996. Grounded theory method: Philosophical perspectives, paradigm of inquiry, and postmodernism. Qualitative Health Research, 6, 379-393.
This paper provides a summary of the evolving nature of the ontological, epistemological, and methodological underpinnings of grounded theory method. A useful read for those using grounded theory and considering their epistemological position. (CL)
Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical Sensitivity: advances in the methodology of grounded theory. California, Sociology Press.
Essential reading for anyone interested in taking a Glaserian approach to Grounded Theory. Glaser sets out his approach with passion and clarity (VL).
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1990) Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques.
The first edition sparked a rift between the co-founders of grounded theory. Now on its 4th edition, it is a highly practical guide to the techniques that underpin a Straussian approach. (VL)
Charmaz, K. (2014) Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis (2nd Ed.). London: Sage Publications
For those interested in approaching Grounded Theory from a constructivist perspective. (VL)
Hall, W. & Callery, P. 2001. Enhancing the Rigor of Grounded Theory: incorporating reflexivity and relationality. Qualitative Health Research, 11, (2) 257–272. (AS)
Andrews, M., Squire, C., & Tamboukou, M. (2008). Doing narrative research. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Narrative inquiry covers a vast array of approaches and can feel utterly bewildering. I would not have had the confidence to use it without this book, which is great both on theory and practical applications. (VL)
Murray M. Levels of Narrative Analysis in Health Psychology. Journal of Health Psychology. 2000;5(3):337-347.
I found this is very helpful way of conceptualising the different levels of narrative analysis within health psychology. (VL)
Braun, V & Clarke, V (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), 77-101.
A classic for a reason. Braun and Clark walk the reader through the different stages of the analysis process, highlighting key issues for consideration at each stage. (VL)
Braun, V & Clarke, V (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11:4, 589-597.
Neale, J. (2016) Iterative categorisation (IC): a systematic technique for analysing qualitative data. Addiction,111(6),1096-1106.
Demystifies the coding process and gives a fantastic step-by-step guide. (VL)
Saldana, J. (2015) The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Third Edition. Sage
Braun & Clarke. Can I use TA? Should I use TA? Should I not use TA? Comparing reflexive thematic analysis and other pattern‐based qualitative analytic approaches. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research. First published: 18 October 2020
Gale, N.K., Heath, G., Cameron, E. et al. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol 13, 117 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-117
Ritchie J, Lewis J, McNaughton Nicholls C & Ormston (2014) Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. Los Angeles: Sage.
Thorne S. (2017) Metasynthetic Madness: What Kind of Monster Have We Created? Qualitative Health Research;27(1):3-12.
Thomas, J., Harden, A. (2008) Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol; 8, 45.
Cornwall, Andrea and Rachel Jewkes R. (1995) What is participatory research? Social Science & Medicine, 41: 1667–1676.
Nelson G., Ochocka J., Griffin K., Lord J (1998) "Nothing About Me, Without Me": Participatory Action Research with Self-Help/Mutual Aid Organizations for Psychiatric Consumer/Survivors, Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal; Spring 2002; 25, 4; Social Science Premium Collection. 379
Oliver, K., Kothari, A. & Mays, N. (2019). The dark side of coproduction: do the costs outweigh the benefits for health research?. Health Res Policy Sys 17, 33
Williams, O., Sarre, S., Papoulias, S.C. et al. Lost in the shadows: reflections on the dark side of co-production. Health Res Policy Sys 18, 43 (2020).
Williams, O., Robert, G., Martin, G. P., Hanna, E., O’Hara, J. (2020) Is co-production just really good PPI? Making sense of patient and public involvement and co-production networks.
Faulkner, A. (2004) The Ethics of Survivor Research: guidelines for the ethical conduct of research carried out by mental health service users and survivors Bristol, Policy Press on behalf of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation
Sweeney A, Beresford P, Faulkner A, Nettle M, & Rose D (Eds) (2009) This is Survivor Research. PCCS: Monmouth.
Russo, J (2012) Survivor-controlled research: a new foundation for thinking about psychiatry and mental health. Forum: Qualitative Social Research 13, Art 8. doi: 10.17169/fqs-13.1.1790
Shimmin C, Wittmeier KDM, Lavoie JG, Wicklund ED, Sibley KM. (2017) Moving towards a more inclusive patient and public involvement in health research paradigm: the incorporation of a trauma‐informed intersectional analysis. BMC Health Serv Res; 17: 539.
Gillard S, Simons L TK et al. (2012) Patient and public involvement in the coproduction of knowledge: reflection on the analysis of qualitative data in a mental health study. Qual Health Res;22(8):1126–37
Eisikovits, Z., and C.Koren. (2010) Approaches to and outcomes of dyadic interview analysis. Qualitative Health Research 20,:1642–55. doi:10.1177/1049732310376520.
Forbat, L., and J.Henderson. (2003) “Stuck in the middle with you”: The ethics and process of qualitative research with two people in an intimate relationship. Qualitative Health Research 13:1453–62. doi:10.1177/1049732303255836.
Ummel, D., and M.Achille. (2016) How not to let secrets out when conducting qualitative research with dyads. Qualitative Health Research 26:807–15.
Malterud, K., Siersma, V., & Guassora, A. (2016). Sample size in qualitative interview studies: Guided by information power. Qualitative Health Research, 26, 1753–1760.
Morse, J. (2000). Determining sample size. Qualitative Health Research, 10(1), 3–5. doi:10.1177/104973200129118183
Saunders, B., Sim, J., Kingstone, T. et al. Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Qual Quant 52, 1893–1907 (2018).