Following on from the on going discussion on sampling in the paper above, I am still uncertain if we are truly evaluating this as a qualitative paper or if we are subtly moving into critiques of the sample, methods, etc using criteria used for quantitative research.
For example, there are concerns about the representativeness of the population. My understanding of sampling in qualitative research is that it does not need to be so. In this paper, they are exploring the experiences around disclosure of domestic violence in a specific population. To some extent, they can only interview a certain population.
Similarly, the use of thematic analyses is an accepted way of analysing large amounts of qualitative data. The themes that emerge are not under the control of the researcher. Neither is any other information about the sample, like history of perpetrating violence. Is it possible to exclude all these 'outliers' without diluting the findings of the study quite significantly?
Whether we accept that their sampling, methods and analysis are appropriate, would then depend on the assessment of tranferability of the findings. Suffice to say, I'm slightly confused as to what i'm looking for in a quallitative paper.
I started a different thread to find out what other people's views are on the 'quantitative vs qualitative' criteria in critical appraisal of this paper.