Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Dr Richard Lee, Ruth Hart, Rose Watson, Dr Tim Rapley
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0).
Synthesising qualitative research involves working through difficult practical issues. Drawing upon our collective experience of undertaking three meta-ethnographies, we consider the forms of work – the practical action and practical reasoning – comprising this kind of synthesis and the difference they make to a meta-ethnography. We detail the origins and aims of meta-ethnography, and present a review of existing meta-ethnographies with a specific focus on the methods the authors reported as central to the conduct of meta-ethnography. We consider the implications of these methods and the reason for the presence (and absence) of particular practices in reporting on meta-ethnographies. Drawing upon our own experiences of conducting meta-ethnographies we focus on the methods used in two key practices central to meta-ethnography: ‘reading’ and ‘conceptual innovation’. We conclude by discussing how the meta-ethnographic process requires active reading, a recognition of multiplicity, a realistic approach to conceptual innovation and, importantly, collaborative work.
Author(s): Lee RP, Hart RI, Watson RM, Rapley T
Publication type: Article
Publication status: Published
Journal: Qualitative Research
Year: 2015
Volume: 15
Issue: 3
Pages: 334-350
Print publication date: 01/06/2015
Online publication date: 24/02/2014
Acceptance date: 08/12/2013
Date deposited: 20/12/2015
ISSN (print): 1468-7941
ISSN (electronic): 1741-3109
Publisher: Sage Publications Ltd.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1468794114524221
DOI: 10.1177/1468794114524221
Altmetrics provided by Altmetric
