Sex Roles

, Volume 79, Issue 3–4, pp 125–135 | Cite as

Considerations in Qualitative Research Reporting: A Guide for Authors Preparing Articles for Sex Roles

  • Sheryl L. ChatfieldEmail author
Feminist Forum Review Article


Qualitative inquiry is frequently used to deepen understanding, improve empathy, and inspire social change, making it particularly appropriate for researchers using feminist, critical or other frameworks that encourage readers to consider issues of power and privilege. Gender researchers using qualitative inquiry are able to select from within a multitude of qualitative approaches to address the purpose of any given research study. The availability of so many approaches makes it challenging to provide one set of “best practices” for qualitative inquiry. The purpose of the present paper is to address this challenge by providing a combination of general and approach-specific guidelines for authors who aspire to write qualitative original research articles for publication in Sex Roles. I begin by providing broad guidelines, follow with approach-specific considerations, and finish the paper with advice related to common practices in qualitative research reporting. I also provide a sample of authoritative sources authors might wish to consult and cite in their research papers.


Qualitative research Publication Author guidelines Gender research 



Thanks to Jennifer McGarry, as well as Karen Elizabeth Dill-Shackleford, Russell Luyt, and C.J. Pascoe, for their valuable input on drafts of the present paper.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The author has no conflicts of interest to declare regarding this work.


  1. American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  2. Banks, M. (2007). Using visual data in qualitative research. London, UK: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barone, T., & Eisner, E. W. (2011). Arts based research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Bazeley, P. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: Practical strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Berkovitch, N., & Manor, S. (2018). Narratives of Israeli women in retirement: Rewriting the gender contract. Sex Roles. Advance online publication.
  6. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. (R. Nice, Trans. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101. Scholar
  8. Butler-Kisber, L. (2010). Qualitative inquiry: Thematic, narrative, and arts-informed perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Charmez, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. Clandinin, D. J. (2013). Engaging in narrative inquiry. Abington, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Critical Skills Appraisal Programme. (2017). CASP qualitative checklist. Retrieved from
  13. Ellis, C. (2013). The ethnographic I: A methodological novel about autoethnography. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.Google Scholar
  14. Fetterman, D. M. (2010). Ethnography step-by-step (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  15. Gee, J. P. (2014). An introduction to discourse analysis theory and method (4th ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Gibbs, G. (2007). Qualitative data analysis. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  17. Giorgi, A. (2009). The descriptive phenomenological method in psychology: A modified Husserlian approach. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University.Google Scholar
  18. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New Brunswick, NJ: Aldine.Google Scholar
  19. Goffman, A. (2014). On the run: Fugitive life in an American city. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hesse-Bieber, S. N. (2010). Mixed methods research: Merging theory with practice. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  22. Hesse-Biber, S. (2016). Qualitative or mixed methods research inquiry approaches: Some loose guidelines for publishing in sex roles. Sex Roles, 74, 6–9. Scholar
  23. Holland, S. (2009). Preparation and determination: Three vignettes of gendered leisure. Journal of Gender Studies, 18(1), 35–45. Scholar
  24. Kings, C. A., Knight, T., Ryan, D., & Macdonald, J. A. (2017). The “sensory deprivation tank”: An interpretative phenomenological analysis of men’s expectations of first-time fatherhood. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 18(2), 112–122. Scholar
  25. Leavy, P. (2015). Method meets art (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  26. Lewin, S., Glenton, C., Munthe-Kaas, H, Carlsen, B., Colvin, C.J., Gilmezoblu, M., ... Rashidian, A. (2015). Using qualitative evidence in decision making for health and social interventions: An approach to assess confidence in findings for qualitative evidence syntheses (GRADE-CERQual). PLoS Medicine 12(10), e1001895.
  27. Miller, Y., Kark, R., & Zohar, N. (2018). Her/his ethics? Managerial ethics in moral decision-making from a contextual, gendered, and relational perspective. Sex Roles. Advance online publication.
  28. Morgan, E. M., & Davis-Delano, L. R. (2016). How public displays of heterosexual identity reflect and reinforce gender stereotypes, gender differences, and gender inequality. Sex Roles, 75(5–6), 257–271. Scholar
  29. Morse, J. M. (1999). Qualitative generalizability. Qualitative Health Research, 9(1), 5–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Morse, J. M. (2008). "What's your favorite color?" reporting irreverent demographics in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 18(3), 299–300. Scholar
  31. Morse, J. M., & Niehaus, L. (2009). Mixed method design: Principles and procedures. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast.Google Scholar
  32. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Neuendorf, K. A. (2011). Content analysis—A methodological primer for gender researchers. Sex Roles, 64(3–4), 276–289. Scholar
  34. Paterson, B. L., Thorne, S. E., Canam, C., & Jillings, C. (2001). Meta-study of qualitative health research: A practical guide to meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Reissman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  36. Saldaña, J. (2011). Fundamentals of qualitative research. Oxford: New York.Google Scholar
  37. Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  38. Sandelowski, M. (2000). Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing and Health, 23, 334–340.<334::AID-NUR9>3.0.CO;2-G.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2007). Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  40. Schreier, J. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  41. Smith, J. A. (2011). Evaluating the contribution of interpretative phenomenological analysis. Health Psychology Review, 5(1), 9–27. Scholar
  42. Smith, J. A., Flower, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  43. Spradley, J. P. (1979/2016). The ethnographic interview. Long Grove, IL: Waveland.Google Scholar
  44. Stack, C. (1974). All our kin: Strategies for survival in a Black community. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  45. Spradley, J. P. (1980/2016). Participant observation. Long Grove, IL: Waveland.Google Scholar
  46. Stack, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  47. Svenningsen, H., Egerod, I., & Dreyer, P. (2016). Strange and scary memories of the intensive care unit: A qualitative, longitudinal study inspired by Ricoeur’s interpretation theory. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 25, 2807–2815. Scholar
  48. Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  49. Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349–357. Scholar
  50. Van Manen, M. (2016). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. Whyte, W. F. (1967). Street corner society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  52. Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2015). Methods of critical discourse studies (3rd ed.). London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  53. Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Public HealthKent State UniversityKentUSA

Personalised recommendations