Index

Citation

Haenssgen, M.J. (2019), "Index", Interdisciplinary Qualitative Research in Global Development: A Concise Guide, Emerald Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 211-217. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-83909-229-920191012

Publisher

:

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2020 Emerald Publishing Limited

---

INDEX

Note: Page numbers followed by “n” with numbers indicate notes.

Action research

, 18–20, 50, 116

Analysis

content

, 12, 72, 89n1, 107, 63–67

conversation

, 89, 85–86

discourse

, 15, 85–87

framework

, 107, 67–85

narrative

, 135, 85–86

open-ended inductive

, 89

qualitative comparative

, 4, 63

quantitative

, 21, 64–65

semi-quantitative

, 4

thematic

, 21, 40, 68, 74, 85, 89, 107, 70–72

visual

, 87–89

whole group

, 85

Anonymity

, 125

Anthropological research (see Ethnography)

Antibiotics and Activity Spaces

, 9, 37, 96

Archival methods

, 107

Article

, 40, 92, 97, 105, 108, 112–114

Assumption

, 6, 3–4, 87, 120

Authentic/authenticity (see also Quality criteria)

, 59, 61, 66, 130, 136, 138

Authorship

, 108–109

Blog

, 40–41, 86, 102, 113, 115

Bungee Research

, 120, 128

Case study

, 22, 14–15, 40, 63, 65, 115, 138

Cell phone (see Mobile phone)

China

, 10, 41, 71–72, 114–115

Co-production/knowledge co-production/co-creation

, 18–20, 50, 96

Code/coding

, 57, 65, 72, 75, 65–66, 135, 69–70

Coding frame/coding tree/coding matrix

, 90, 93, 97, 102, 69–70

Collaboration/collaborator

, 2, 21–22, 107, 120, 123, 135, 137

Colonial/neo-colonial (see also Bungee Research)

, 40, 87

Community engagement (see Public Engagement)

Community/communities

, 14, 20, 25, 18–19, 46, 50, 57, 74, 42–44, 103, 126, 129, 130, 134

Compensation

, 128–129

Confirmability (see also Quality criteria)

, 103–105

Conflict

, 3, 13, 105, 127

Consent

, 29, 44, 60, 125–126

informed

, 28, 35, 38, 60, 129

oral/verbal

, 129

Context/contextualisation/contextualising

, 2, 6–7, 18, 14–15, 29, 40, 49, 51, 69, 72, 93, 104, 110, 112, 117, 119, 129, 64–67, 138, 86–87

Conversation

, 3, 29, 36, 38, 48, 25–26, 57, 32–34, 73, 89, 92, 125, 127, 129, 85–87

Costs

, 23, 33, 35

Credibility (see also Quality criteria)

, 54, 102, 104–105

Cross-sectional research

, 13–14

Cultural/culture

, 17, 43, 45, 108, 118, 120, 86–87

Data

analysis plan

, 88

big

, 41

management

, 128, 129, 134

meta

, 41, 66

primary

, 48, 66, 86

qualitative

, 13, 16, 18, 27, 32, 37, 21–22, 43, 48, 63, 66, 74, 40–41, 85, 95, 97, 100, 102, 57–58, 69–71, 88–89, 110–111, 115–116, 123–127

quantitative

, 23, 15–16, 37, 38

secondary

, 41, 126

set

, 2, 41, 110, 116, 126

sharing

, 78, 125–126

user-generated qualitative

, 86

Deterministic/determinism (see also Prescriptive)

, 130

Eligibility

, 56, 59

EQUATOR Network

, 105

Ethics/ethical/research ethics

approval

, 115, 131n1, 125–127, 130–131

committee

, 37, 127, 129, 131

review

, 127

Ethnographic/ethnography

, 7, 22, 11–12, 27, 16–18, 43, 57, 86, 92, 107, 116, 123, 130

Etiquette

, 29, 59

Evaluation

ex post

, 21

impact

, 21

process

, 20–22

Excerpt

, 70, 78, 97, 101, 91–92

Extractive (see also Bungee Research)

, 31, 40, 128, 130

Field research

, 18, 48, 50, 96, 123

Focus group discussion

, 13, 21, 40, 32–37, 72, 116, 121

Frame/framework

analysis

, 107, 67–85

analytical

, 9, 14, 16, 71, 90, 46–47, 93, 107, 112

conceptual

, 14, 16, 27, 46, 68–69

preliminary

, 27, 89

theoretical

, 14, 16, 68

Friction

disciplinary

, 133–139

mixed-methods research as source of

, 23

Generalisable/generalisability (see also Quality criteria)

, 10, 15, 41, 103–104

Google

, 89n2

Guatemala

, 64

Hierarchies

, 4, 24, 12–13, 66, 107, 134

Illustrate/illustration

, 7, 9, 31, 44, 48, 73, 75, 94, 96, 98, 91–92, 100–102

Image

, 25, 49, 88, 96, 102, 92–93

Immersion

, 17–18, 43, 69

Impact assessment (see Evaluation)

Inclusion (see also Eligibility; Representation)

, 21, 24n2, 65, 87, 99, 104

India

, 6, 10, 58, 116, 71–72

Infographic

, 93, 101–102

Infrastructure

, 7, 95

Intercoder reliability

, 74

Interpretation

, 3–5, 16, 23, 41, 43, 46, 59, 64, 67, 77, 110, 126, 138, 121–124

Intervention

, 2, 14–15, 31, 19–21, 50, 135, 110–112

Interview

cognitive

, 75, 37–40, 77

expert

, 25, 51, 65, 72

guide

, 9, 29, 42, 26–27, 72, 74, 39–40, 123

in-depth

, 2, 26, 86

key informant

, 51

semi-structured

, 13, 32, 39, 26–27, 72, 85

structured

, 29, 38, 26–27, 57

unstructured

, 27, 29

Jargon

communication with audiences

, 138–139

jargon-free audiences

, 114

Language

, 4, 8, 15, 18, 31, 40, 46, 48, 77, 86, 43–44, 114, 124, 129, 120–122, 137–138

Laos

, 9–10, 75, 92

Legitimate/legitimacy

, 4, 54, 135

Limitations

, 42, 44, 66, 126, 105–106

Literature

, 10–12, 27, 89, 137, 70–72, 112–113

Longitudinal research

, 13–14

Low-and middle-income countries

, 5, 13

Manuscript

, 108, 124, 110–113

Map/mapping

, 42, 46, 69, 73, 100, 135, 138

Mixed-method research

, 9, 11, 22–24, 71, 115, 137, 103–104

Mobile phone

, 36, 29–30, 61, 94, 72–73

News, newspaper

, 48, 55, 40–41, 116

Non-governmental organisation

, 12, 65, 129

Notes/notebook/field notes

, 35, 40, 48, 28–33, 42–43

Observation

covert

, 45

guide

, 9, 48, 60, 123

non-participant

, 42

participant

, 18, 42–43

Offline

, 88, 102

Online

, 10, 56, 58, 66, 41–42, 100, 102

Oral history

, 14, 25

Parachuting (see also Bungee Research)

, 120

Paradigm

, 3–4, 8, 24, 137

Participants

, 38, 18–24, 44, 46, 57, 59, 60, 32–36, 85, 92, 96, 49–51, 104, 109, 115, 120, 122, 134, 126–129

Participatory research

, 18, 51n3, 49–50

Phenomenological research

, 14

Photo elicitation/photovoice

, 49, 51n3

Photograph

, 18, 22, 68, 96, 48–50, 117, 128, 87–88, 92–93

Picture

, 43, 48

Plagiarism/self-plagiarism

, 110

Policy/policy document

, 15, 93, 64–65, 135, 86–87

Population/sub-population

, 8, 19, 35, 50n1, 53, 55, 58

Positionality (see also Quality criteria)

, 123, 125, 130, 119–120

Poster

, 93, 101–102

Power

relationships

, 86, 119

relationships in distribution of food

, 65

relationships between interviewer and interviewee

, 66

relationships between researcher and respondents

, 103

between researcher and research participants

, 120

Pragmatic objectives

, 21, 113

Pre-submission enquiry

, 111–112

Prescriptive

, 106

Press release

, 113–114

Privilege(d)

, 5, 30, 59, 122

Protect(ion) (see also Research ethics)

, 48, 129, 125–127

Protocol (see Research Protocol)

Public engagement

, 10, 22, 96, 117

Publication, publication culture

, 8, 12, 24, 124, 138, 108–110

Quality criteria/quality standards

, 24, 102–107

Quantification

, 74, 95

Rapid appraisal

, 20–21, 58

Rapport

, 43, 60

Reality/realities

, 3, 6, 21, 18–19, 43, 50, 87

Recorder

, 28, 33

Recruitment

, 59, 56–57, 129

Reflexivity (see also Quality criteria)

, 103–104, 119–121

Relationships

, 7, 17, 20, 46, 71, 73, 86, 88, 99, 103, 119, 122, 126, 130, 65–66

Relevance (see also Quality criteria)

, 30, 103–104

Replicable/replicability (see also Quality criteria)

, 64, 104

Report

, 2, 21–22, 119, 121, 127, 114–115

Reporting standards/reporting guidelines (see also Quality criteria)

, 91, 102–107

Representation

, 59, 71, 87, 98, 49–50, 53–54, 126, 130, 102–103

Research assistant (see also Translator)

, 35, 59, 124, 121–122

Research design

, 5, 8, 34, 11–24, 43, 69, 86, 89, 130, 137

Research ethics (see Ethics)

Research philosophy/philosophical position/methodological theory (see also Paradigm)

, 3, 5, 74

Research Protocol

, 130, 139

Respondent (see Participant)

Review

literature

, 11, 71

meta-ethnography

, 106

narrative

, 12, 34

realist

, 12, 106

systematic

, 12–13, 64, 104, 106, 97–99

Rigour (see also Quality criteria)

, 24, 26, 43, 54, 93, 103, 126

Risk

, 50, 93, 120, 130, 131

Sample/sampling

convenience

, 56, 53–54

frame

, 55

information saturation

, 16, 57

maximum variation

, 54–55

non-probabilistic

, 54, 56, 58

probabilistic

, 54

purposive

, 54, 138

random

, 55, 58, 74

random walk

, 55

self-sign-up, self-recruitment

, 55

size

, 56, 58, 136

snowball

, 12, 56

theoretical

, 16, 57

Secondary data/secondary material

, 40–42, 126

Social media

, 41, 65

Software

, 38, 41, 88, 102, 65–66

Study protocol (see Research protocol)

Study subject (see Participant)

Survey

, 2, 6, 26, 22–23, 37–40, 93

Technology

, 6, 15, 20, 72, 110, 113

Text

, 4, 10, 31, 41-42, 91, 124, 68–69

Thailand, Siam

, 9–10, 36, 75, 96, 100

Theme

, 12, 16, 27, 57, 31–32, 85, 88, 93, 97, 101, 116, 67–69, 71–74

Theory, grounded

, 16, 31, 57, 69, 71

Topic guide (see Interview guide)

Training

, 4, 116, 124, 135, 137

Transcribe/transcription

, 40, 31–32, 35–36, 89, 92, 121, 124

Transferability (see also Quality criteria)

, 103–104

Transformative objectives

, 49–50, 107

Translate/translation

, 31, 41, 78, 86, 94, 111, 136, 122–124

Translator (see also Research assistant)

, 31, 121–122

Triangulate/triangulation

, 23, 105

Trust

with community members

, 43

between researcher and community

, 129

between researcher and participant

, 125

between translators and research assistants

, 122

Tweet/Twitter

, 4, 65, 40–41

UK

content analysis in

, 65

Economic and Social Research Council

, 9, 146

interdisciplinary research

, 10

Research Council

, 118n6

research funding landscape

, 135

Value

, 59, 68, 93, 128, 121–122

Video

, 25, 28, 42, 88, 116, 48–49–50, 128–129

Visual research, visual methods

, 51n3, 49–50, 128

Voice

, 36, 59, 101, 109, 113, 139

Web/website

, 41, 111, 116, 127

Word cloud

, 93, 98, 102