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.

摘要

由于存在大量在范式、哲学和程序上不同的 TA 迭代，为主题分析 (TA) 制定通用质量标准变得复杂。TA 中的这种多元性通常不被编辑、审稿人或作者认可，他们将“编码可靠性度量”作为质量 TA 的普遍要求。特别关注我们的反射TA 方法，我们参考我们在已发表的 TA 研究中发现的十个常见问题来讨论 TA 的质量，这些问题引用或声称遵循我们的指导。许多常见问题都以 TA 的同质性假设为基础。最后，我们以 20 个关键问题的形式为审稿人和编辑概述了指导方针，以支持他们促进 TA 研究的高（er）标准，以及将 TA 作为方法和实践进行更深思熟虑和反思性的参与。