Daniel F. Detzner

Understanding and evaluating qualitative research

During the past 6 years (1989-1994), the Journal of Marriage and the Family has published 527 articles. Only 10 or 1.9% were qualitative, either entirely (4) or partly (1), or in a combination of qualitative and quantitative data (5). Four other articles were based on qualitative data, but the results were entirely quantified. These four articles would raise the total of qualitative papers to 15 or 2.8%. These statistics are rather startling, especially when considering that there is a large theoretical literature pertaining to qualitative research, numerous articles and texts on its methods, a rapidly growing body of empirical research with the family field as one of its major beneficiaries (Gilgun, Daly, & Handel, 1992; Rosenblatt & Fischer, 1993), and a well-organized network on qualitative family research, with a newsletter of the same name. JMF, however, is not unique in terms of rarely publishing qualitative articles (see LaRossa & Wolf, 1985; Nye, 1988, on family research). Editorial boards of high-profile journals in family studies, psychology, and sociology are composed of well-published scholars, only a minority of whom are experienced qualitative researchers. The result is that a majority of the qualitative articles submitted have to be evaluated by scholars who have little expertise in qualitative research, or by qualitative researchers who have no expertise in the substantive area of a submitted article or who subscribe to a different epistemology. In contrast, quantitative papers can generally be matched with reviewers who not only understand the methods, but are also knowledgeable in the substantive area covered. It thus becomes important to discuss some of the problems inherent in evaluating qualitative research. Consequently, the focus of this article is practical and not theoretical. We address naturalistic qualitative research in terms of methods. In addition, because qualitative research has become extremely varied, we have limited the purview of this article to epistemologies that involve the observation, interview, or written participation of family members, rather than the analysis or deconstruction of texts, for instance. The statistics presented earlier clearly indicate that JMF is a quantitative journal, with a readership primarily composed of quantitative researchers. We have, therefore, written this article for scholars who are quantitatively oriented: Our vocabulary and material covered reflect this focus. Because several qualitative approaches are included within the vast umbrella of naturalistic fieldwork, we also hope to reach qualitative researchers who are very specialized within one particular epistemology or qualitative approach. In order to retain a certain practical focus, we could not discuss postmodernist approaches. Moreover, because most of us are sociologically trained, the bulk of the literature reviewed falls within this discipline. We use a quantitative/qualitative dichotomy only for heuristic purposes. At a historical juncture where traditional, theoretical, and empirical alignments should at least cohabit and new configurations are appearing (Alexander & Colomy, 1990, p. 56), one can only hope for an improved understanding between advocates of both sets of approaches and a decrease in the either/or dichotomous thinking that devalues the efforts of any one approach to knowledge generation. This hope also extends to adherents of the several distinct qualitative epistemologies. In a first section, we present general information on qualitative research in terms of its goals and procedures. This is followed by a discussion of linkages between epistemologies and methods in qualitative research; our own diverse orientations are outlined at the end of this discussion. In a third section, we broach more specific aspects of the evaluation process. Then we examine frequently encountered problems in the evaluation process, focusing on problems unwittingly created both by reviewers and authors. …

Communication Dynamics of the Transnational Family

This study explores how Turkish transnational families use communication technology to maintain connections across oceans. Its findings are drawn from a larger study that examined how transnational families maintain intergenerational relationships over distance and time. A grounded theory approach was used to conduct and analyze interviews with 30 Turkish immigrants living in the Midwest region of the United States. Results pertaining to the use of communication technology demonstrate that Turkish transnational families use a variety of communication strategies to maintain family relations. Specifically, they indicate that (1) telephone calls are crucial in facilitating communication; (2) e-mail facilitates communication, particularly between the younger generations; and (3) web-cams are used relatively infrequently. Each of these themes is discussed, and implications for future research are presented.

Hmong American New Year Rituals : Generational Bonds through Dress

Within performed ritual, Hmong Americans use dress as a medium to express a vision of cultural life responsive to both their cultural past and their new American context. This article is a part of a larger research project focused on the role of dress in the formulation of Hmong American cultural life. This paper focuses on how dress is used within two different New Year performances to make sense of the position of the Hmong in America. Public and private Hmong American New Year rituals are arenas wherein dress is used to express the struggle for reconciliation between the older and younger generations, the old and new ways, and Hmong and American cultures. Separate and differently focused New Year celebrations formally acknowledge the valued roles of Hmong elders as links to the Hmong past and Hmong youth as links to an American future. Both celebrations incorporate a recognition of the core problem of reconciling Hmong and American cultures. Both use dress to give voice to the young and the old as they struggle for cultural definition in the United States.

Transmission and Reconstruction of Gender through Dress: Hmong American New Year Rituals

This is the second of two articles focused on the role of dress in the formulation of Hmong American cultural life. The first article focused on the performance of two versions of Hmong American New Year and how dress is used by Hmong Americans to make sense of their position between the cultural world of the past and contemporary American culture. This paper centers on the transmission and reconstruction of female gender roles in the American context as expressed through womens headdress worn to the Hmong American New Year celebration. Both uses of dress arose out of attempts to reconcile the cultural life of the past with their lives in the United States; both are expressed visually through the dressed and evaluated body within the context of the Hmong New Year celebration.

Developing the news habit in the introductory american government course

Abstract Instructors in the introductory American government course should consider the daily/weekly news gathering habits of their students when planning the course. Like the adult population as a whole, many college students are not well informed about current political events and participants. It is possible to restructure the course to emphasize the value of developing a daily “news habit,” while continuing to survey traditional American government course materials. Student surveys reveal significant increases in daily/weekly “news habits” as a result of new techniques introduced in the course, with the largest improvement occurring in daily newspaper reading.