Preregistrations—records made a priori about study designs and analysis plans and placed in open repositories—are thought to strengthen the credibility and transparency of research. Different authors have put forth arguments in favor of introducing this practice in qualitative research and made suggestions for what to include in a qualitative preregistration form. The goal of this study was to gauge and understand what parts of preregistration templates qualitative researchers would find helpful and informative. We used an online Delphi study design consisting of two rounds with feedback reports in between. In total, 48 researchers participated (response rate: 16%). In round 1, panelists considered 14 proposed items relevant to include in the preregistration form, but two items had relevance scores just below our predefined criterion (68%) with mixed argument and were put forth again. We combined items where possible, leading to 11 revised items. In round 2, panelists agreed on including the two remaining items. Panelists also converged on suggested terminology and elaborations, except for two terms for which they provided clear arguments. The result is an agreement-based form for the preregistration of qualitative studies that consists of 13 items. The form will be made available as a registration option on Open Science Framework (osf.io). We believe it is important to assure that the strength of qualitative research, which is its flexibility to adapt, adjust and respond, is not lost in preregistration. The preregistration should provide a systematic starting point.
775revista de ciencia pOLítica/vOLumen 29 / nº 3 / 2009 / 775 -798 * aprovechamos la oportunidad en agradecer al proyecto FOndecYt nº 1060749 por todo el apoyo prestado para la realización de este trabajo, así como a los réferis anónimos de rcp por su invaluable lectura.
The design and registration of Pre-analysis Plans (PAP) represents a significant improvement in social science research transparency. This tool is commonly used in experimental research. In this research note, we suggest extending the use of PAP to qualitative research. In recent decades, researchers have produced several meth-odological innovations, which have improved the quality of qualitative analysis. New tools also have been developed and researchers have taken important steps to improve data collection and transparency in the analysis of qualitative data. The development of Pre-analysis Plan-Qualitative (PAP-Q) aims to synthetize these advances into a guide for researchers, in order to improve transparency and better specify the role of induction in the construction of causal arguments. El diseño y el registro de Planes Pre-Análisis (PAP) representa un avance significativo en la transparencia de la investigación en ciencias sociales. Esta herramienta es comúnmente usada en la investigación experimental. En esta nota de investigación proponemos expandir el uso de los PAP a la investigación cualitativa. En las décadas recientes, se han producido una serie de innovaciones metodológicas que han mejorado la calidad de los análisis cualita-tivos. Estas nuevas herramientas han permitido que los investigadores hayan avanzado en el mejoramiento de los procesos de recolección de datos y la transparencia en el análisis de datos cualitativo. El desarrollo de Planes Pre-Análisis Cualitativos (PAP-Q) busca sintetizar es-tos avances como guía de investigación para mejorar la transparencia y la especificación del rol de la inducción en la construcción de argumentos causales. Palabras clave: plan pre-análisis, investigación cualitativa, transparencia, inducción * We thank
Preregistrations -- records made a priori about study designs and analysis plans and placed in open repositories -- are thought to strengthen the credibility and transparency of research. Different authors have put forth arguments in favor of introducing this practice in qualitative research and made suggestions for what to include in a qualitative preregistration form. The goal of this study was to attain consensus among qualitative researchers on which items to include in a qualitative study preregistration form. We defined consensus as 68% agreement and used an online Delphi study design consisting of two rounds with feedback reports in between. In total, 45 researchers participated (response rate: 15%). In round 1, panelists considered 14 proposed items relevant to include in the preregistration form, but 2 items had a 66% relevance score with mixed argument and were put forth again. We combined items where possible, leading to 11 revised items. In round 2, panelists attained consensus on including the two remaining items. Panelists also reached consensus on suggested terminology and elaborations, with the exception of two terms for which they provided clear arguments. The result is a consensus-based form for the preregistration of qualitative studies that consists of 13 items. The form will be made available as a registration option on Open Science Framework. We believe it is important to assure that the strength of qualitative research, which is its flexibility to adapt, adjust and respond, is not lost in preregistration. The preregistration should provide a systematic starting point.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.