A Critique of Qualitative Research Methodology in Family Studies

가족학 분야에서의 질적 연구 경향 및 방법론적 문제점

  • 천혜정 (이화여자대학교 소비자인간발달학과)
  • Published : 2004.10.01

Abstract

Although scholars have been using qualitative research commonly since 1990 in Korea, discussions on the criteria for the quality of qualitative research have been rare. The purpose of this paper was to analyze the trends of qualitative research methodology in Family Studies, and critically examine qualitative research articles published in the three most prominent journals in the field of family studies. The three journals were Journal of Korean Home Management Association, Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association, and Journal of Family Relations. During the period from 1998 to 2003, twenty seven published articles were identified as qualitative research articles from the three journals. Qualitative research in family studies had a wide variety of purposes, but the articles shared similar characteristics: the main goal was to understand the nature of the research participants' experiences and perspectives. The common data collection techniques were in-depth interview, journal writing, and document analysis. Also, all research articles had applied various techniques to data analysis such as grounded theory, or van Manen's method. This article also discussed the usefulness of qualitative research methodology in broadening and deepening the knowledge body in Korean Family Studies.

References

  1. 모수미 등(1996). 가정학원론. 서울: 한국방송통신대학교
  2. 한국해석학회(1996). 해석과 이해. 서울: 지평 문화사
  3. Ambert, A., Adler, P. A., Adler, P. & Deitzner, D. F. (1995). Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 879-893 https://doi.org/10.2307/353409
  4. Deacon, S. A. (2000). Creativity within qualitative research on families: New ideas for old methods. Qualitative Report, 4(3/4), http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR4- 1/deacon.html
  5. Eisner, E. W.(1991). The enlightened eye. New York: Macmillan
  6. Eisner, E. W. & Peshkin, A. (1990). Qualitative inquiry in education: The continuing debate. New York: Teachers College
  7. Goodwin, W. L. & Goodwin, L. D. (1996). Understanding quantitative and qualitative research in early childhood education. New York: Teachers College
  8. Harbermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and human interests. London: Heineman
  9. Hultgren, F. H.(1989). Introduction to interpretive inquiry. In F. H. Hultgren & D. L. Coomer (Eds.). Alternative modes of inquiry in home economics research (37-59), Peoria, IL: Glencoe
  10. Gadamer, H. G. (1975). Truth and method. New York: Crossroad
  11. Kockelmans, J. J.(1994). Edmund Husserl's Phenomenology, 임헌규 옮김(2000). 후설의 현상학. 서울: 청계
  12. Kvale, S. (1983). The qualitative research interview: A phenomenological and a hermeneutical mode of understanding. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 14(2), 171-196 https://doi.org/10.1163/156916283X00090
  13. Lincoln, Y. S. (1990). Toward a categorical interpretative for qualitative research. In E. W. Eisner & A. Peskin.(Eds.). Qualitative inquiry in edumtion(277-295), New York: Teachers College Press
  14. McClelland, J. (1995). Sending children to kindergarten: A phenomenological study of mothers' experiences. Family Relations, 44, 177-183 https://doi.org/10.2307/584806
  15. Morrow, S. L. & Smith, M. L. (1996). Constructions of survival and coping by women who have survived childhood sexual abuse. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42, 24-33 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.42.1.24
  16. Palmer, E. R.(1969). Hermeneutics: Interpretation Theory in Schleiermacher, Dilthey, Heidegger and Gadamer, 이한우 옮김(1990). 해석학이란 무엇인가. 서울: 문예 출판사
  17. Radnitsky, G.(1970). Contemporary schools of metascience. Gothenburg, Sweden: Akademiforlaget
  18. richardson, :L (1992). The poetic representation of lives: Writing a postmodemis sociology. In N. K. Denzin(ed.). Studies in symbolic interaction(19-28), Greenwich, CT: JAI Press
  19. Smith, L. M.(1990). Ethics in qualitative field research: An individual perspective. In E. W. Eisner & A. Peskin.(Eds.). Qualitative inquiry in education(258-276), New York: Teachers College Press
  20. Silverman, H. J.(1984). Phenomenology: From hermeneutics to deconstruction. Research in Phenomenology, 16, 19-34