Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorThelwall, Michael
dc.contributor.authorNevill, Tamara
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-13T08:01:38Z
dc.date.available2021-04-13T08:01:38Z
dc.date.issued2021-05-04
dc.identifier.citationThelwall, M. and Nevill, T. (2021) Is research with qualitative data more prevalent and impactful now? Interviews, case studies, focus groups and ethnographies. Library and Information Science Research, 43(2), Article No. 101094.en
dc.identifier.issn0740-8188en
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.lisr.2021.101094
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2436/624020
dc.descriptionThis is an accepted manuscript of an article published by Elsevier in Library and Information Science Research on 4 May 2021. The accepted version of the publication may differ from the final published version.en
dc.description.abstractResearchers, editors, educators, librarians, and publishers need to understand the mix of research methods used in their field to guide decision making, with qualitative research apparently threatened by big data. In response, this study assesses the prevalence and citation impact of academic research 1996-2019 that reports one of four common methods to gather qualitative data: interviews; focus groups; case studies; ethnography. With minor exceptions, the prevalence of qualitative data has increased, often substantially, since 1996. In addition, all 27 broad fields (as classified by Scopus) now publish some qualitative research, with interviewing being by far the most common approach. The citation impact of interview and focus group research mostly decreased over time, whereas of case study citation impact increased, and ethnography was above average in its two core subject areas. This suggests that methods teachers, researchers, editors, librarians, and publishers should be increasingly open to the value of qualitative data.en
dc.formatapplication/pdfen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherElsevieren
dc.relation.urlhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0740818821000244?via%3Dihuben
dc.subjectQualitative research methodsen
dc.subjectresearch methodsen
dc.subjectInterviewsen
dc.subjectFocus Groupsen
dc.subjectCase studyen
dc.subjectEthnographyen
dc.subjectScientometricsen
dc.subjectBibliometricsen
dc.titleIs research with qualitative data more prevalent and impactful now? Interviews, case studies, focus groups and ethnographiesen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.identifier.journalLibrary and Information Science Researchen
dc.date.updated2021-04-10T18:53:57Z
dc.identifier.articlenumber101094
dc.date.accepted2021-04-23
rioxxterms.funderUniversity of Wolverhamptonen
rioxxterms.identifier.projectUOW13042021MTen
rioxxterms.versionAMen
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/en
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2022-05-04en
dc.source.volume43
dc.source.issue2
dc.source.beginpage1
refterms.dateFCD2021-04-13T08:01:06Z
refterms.versionFCDAM


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Publisher version
Thumbnail
Name:
Thelwall_Nevill_Research_with_ ...
Size:
978.6Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/