H is for Human and How (Not) To Evaluate Qualitative Research in HCI
<|reference_start|>H is for Human and How (Not) To Evaluate Qualitative Research in HCI: Concern has recently been expressed by HCI researchers as to the inappropriate treatment of qualitative studies through a positivistic mode of evaluation that places emphasis on metrics and measurement. This contrasts with the nature of qualitative research, which privileges interpretation and understanding over quantification. This paper explains the difference between positivism and interpretivism, the limits of quantification in human science, the distinctive contribution of qualitative research, and how quality assurance might be provided for in the absence of numbers via five basic criteria that reviewers may use to evaluate qualitative studies on their own terms.<|reference_end|>
@article{crabtree2024h,
    title={H is for Human and How (Not) To Evaluate Qualitative Research in HCI},
    author={Andy Crabtree},
    journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.01302},
    year={2024},
    archivePrefix={arXiv},
    eprint={2409.01302},
    primaryClass={cs.HC}
}