vix.ing · top · new · best · stats · spec

One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis?

2020/08/12 by Virginia Braun, Victoria Clarke · 218 citations
Arts and Humanities · Business, Management and Accounting · Psychology · #Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies #Language, Metaphor, and Cognition #Management and Organizational Studies

paper · doi:10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238

openalex publication_date 2020/08/12 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/31

Abstract

Developing a universal quality standard for thematic analysis (TA) is complicated by the existence of numerous iterations of TA that differ paradigmatically, philosophically and procedurally. This plurality in TA is often not recognised by editors, reviewers or authors, who promote ‘coding reliability measures’ as universal requirements of quality TA. Focusing particularly on our reflexive TA approach, we discuss quality in TA with reference to ten common problems we have identified in published TA research that cites or claims to follow our guidance. Many of the common problems are underpinned by an assumption of homogeneity in TA. We end by outlining guidelines for reviewers and editors – in the form of twenty critical questions – to support them in promoting high(er) standards in TA research, and more deliberative and reflexive engagement with TA as method and practice.

Citations

Cited by

Related