Qualitative Dissertation Chapter Guides for DIT

Version 2.0 – Effective October 2021

Program Director, Dr. Michelle Preiksaitis

Assistant Program Director, Dr. Bradly E. Roh
Academic Director of Research, Dr. Bruce Chapman

225 South Sixth Street, Ninth Floor

Minneapolis, MN 55402
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION TO THIS DOCUMENT ......................................................................... 5

Disclaimers .............................................................................................................. 5

Purpose of this Document ............................................................................................ 5

SafeAssign ............................................................................................ 5

Doctoral Publications Review ...................................................................... 6

Resource............................................................................................... 6

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 7

Background ............................................................................................................. 7

Research Purpose ..................................................................................................... 8

Research Question(s) ................................................................................................. 8

Rationale ................................................................................................................ 9

Significance ........................................................................................................... 10

Definitions of Terms ................................................................................................. 10

Assumptions and Limitations ....................................................................................... 10

Assumptions......................................................................................... 11

Limitations ........................................................................................... 11

Organization of the Remainder of the Study .................................................................... 11

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................... 12

Introduction ........................................................................................................... 12

Conceptual Foundation for the Study ............................................................................. 12

Review of the Literature ............................................................................................. 13

Conclusions ........................................................................................................... 15

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY .................................................................................. 16

Introduction ........................................................................................................... 16

Design and Methodology ........................................................................................... 16

Participants and Setting ............................................................................................. 17

Participants .......................................................................................... 17

2
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

Analysis of the Research Questions .............................................................................. 18

Expert Review Panel ............................................................................... 19

Test Run ............................................................................................. 19

Credibility and Dependability ..................................................................... 19

Data Collection ...................................................................................... 20

Data Analysis ....................................................................................... 20

Ethical Considerations .............................................................................................. 21

Resource............................................................................................. 21

Summary .............................................................................................................. 21

CHAPTER 4. RESULTS ........................................................................................... 22

Introduction ........................................................................................................... 22

Data Collection Results ............................................................................................. 22

Resource............................................................................................. 23

Data Analysis and Results ......................................................................................... 24

Summary .............................................................................................................. 26

Supplement: Description of Qualitative Approaches ........................................................... 26

GENERIC QUALITATIVE INQUIRY RESEARCH ............................................ 27

CASE STUDY ....................................................................................... 29

CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................... 32

Evaluation of Research Questions ................................................................................ 33

Fulfillment of Research Purpose .................................................................................. 33

Contribution to Business Technial Problem .................................................... 34

Recommendations for Future Research ......................................................................... 34

Recommendations developed directly from the data. ........................................ 34

Recommendations derived from methodological, research design, or other limitations of

the study. ............................................................................................. 34

Recommendations based on delimitations. .................................................... 35

Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 35

REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 37

3
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

4
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

INTRODUCTION TO THIS DOCUMENT

Disclaimers
Neither this guide, nor any of the information and requirements contained herein, constitute a
contract, or create any contractual commitments between Capella University and any student, any
prospective student, or any third party. The information and program requirements contained in the
Dissertation Manual are subject to change.

Purpose of this Document

This document presents detailed information about each of the Chapters required for a Capella
dissertation. Sections within each Chapter are also described. Each section in this document aligns
with the Dissertation Template for Qualitative Studies. Carefully read the Chapter Guides so that you
can be certain to provide the material that is necessary to write each section of your dissertation
successfully. Note that this document is descriptive, not prescriptive.

Consult with your mentor about adding headings that might be necessary to enhance the
organizational structure of your dissertation.

*Note: For the full dissertation, you are reporting a study that has already been conducted, therefore
you need to revise the first three chapters of the proposal using past tense verbs. You cannot just
copy from the proposal without changing the verb tense.

SafeAssign
To ensure the originality of your work and the use of appropriate citations, you should submit your
dissertation work through SafeAssign. SafeAssign is a free source-matching tool provided to Capella
learners. SafeAssign analyzes your writing for unintentional plagiarism and improper source
referencing. Be sure to allow 24 hours for a response from SafeAssign and allow time for editing. If
you have questions about using SafeAssign, review Capella's Turnitin tutorials.

You will find several job aids and tutorials. It is especially critical to understand how to interpret your
originality report and how to revise plagiarized or matching text.

As you work through your dissertation, you should use the SafeAssign source matching tool to check
drafts of your work. You may use the draft SafeAssign links multiple times to resubmit your paper for
analysis as part of your editing process.

5
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

Doctoral Publications Review

Doctoral learners must submit completed dissertations for review by Capella's Doctoral Publications
Review team, which monitors to ensure that these deliverables meet Capella's standards for
academic writing and ethical research, and that there is no evidence of plagiarism. It is not the
function of the reviewers to revise, edit or proofread the dissertation or doctoral capstone. The
reviewers will identify issues needing to be addressed by the learner. Learners are responsible for
making required corrections based on the notes from the reviewer, with input and support from their
mentor. Reviewers frequently request a second review to ensure that required corrections have been
made. Remember that the final published dissertation will be available for anyone with access to the
database to review and read. This is your doctoral record. It is your responsibility to make sure it is
accurate and free from errors.

Carefully review the criteria for Doctoral Publications Review. It is important to check your work
against these requirements and work with your mentor to ensure you have adhered to these criteria
prior to submitting your manuscript for your committee's and school's review. The reviewer will check
that you have met requirements in the following key areas:

• Ethical and Legal Requirements

• APA Alignment Requirements
• Dissertation/Capstone Document Requirements
• Writing-Related Requirements

Resource
Note that to access the links, you may need to be signed into Campus. For a clear understanding of
Doctoral Publications requirements and expectations, please carefully review the Doctoral Publications
Guidebook (APA 7th ed.).

6
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
All research reports (including dissertations) begin with an introduction describing the problem under
investigation, the need for the study, its background, relevance to the field, and assumptions and
limitations of the study. This section of the Guide outlines the main sections required in Chapter
One. This Chapter One Guide is organized according to the sections found in most dissertations.
Each section explains the terminology and identifies the issues that need consideration in that
section. As a general guideline, Chapter One is typically 15-20 pages long. DIT learners use a
business technical problem for their projects

Chapter One should discuss eleven specific points: 1) an introduction; 2) the background of the
study; 3) the business technical problem; 4) the research purpose of the study; 5) the research
question(s); 6) the rationale for the study; 7) the conceptual framework; 8) the significance of the
study; 9) definition of terms used in the study; and 10) assumptions and limitations of the study. There
is also a final eleventh section where you will describe the organization and general content of the
rest of the dissertation. Be sure to provide an overview of the contents of Chapter One. Do not
simply list or state the various sections. Rather, provide in discussion format an explanation and
justification of the purpose and organization of the chapter.

Use this Guide to help you write Chapter One. It describes each section to help you ensure that you
have covered the necessary material. You are encouraged to refer to your approved Concept Paper
to guide your content for Chapter One.

Before beginning the second section, “Background of the Study,” write an introduction to the
chapter directly after the CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION heading. The introduction should identify
the research topic and the main points of Chapter One. The Dissertation Template provides all the
necessary headings and sections required for your dissertation. It is recommended that you use it for
all your work.

Background
In this section, you will describe the context and background of the business technical problem.
As the first section of your dissertation, you want to begin by providing your reader with a broad
understanding of the research topic. In the Background section the goal is to give the reader an
overview of the topic, and its context within the real world, research literature, and theory. The
section should focus on the phenomenon under investigation.

In this section, you should address the following three considerations:

Summarize and place in context the present state of the business or research problem from a
scholarly research and practitioner perspective; identify and explain why the problem is worth
researching.
Be sure to integrate scholarly research and practitioner literature related to the business technical
problem. Substantiate and evaluate why the business or research problem is worth researching
using scholarly articles from your specialization.
Present critical data from scholarly publications to paint the context with specific support for the
scope and scale of the problem. Identify the critical elements of the problem or opportunity to be
addressed.

Business Technical Problem

In this section you will formulate and explain a current business (technical) problem.
Begin by explaining the general business technical problem that you foreshadowed in the background

7
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

section. This may be general to businesses at large, or over an industry. DIT learners must align their
study to a technical problem arising in the business setting. The technical problem cannot be purely
technical in nature. It must have negative ramifications on business. For example, you cannot study
how to improve a specific encryption algorithm or how to configure a specific system, but you can study
the challenges that impede the adoption of such an algorithm or system (given that this lack of adoption
has negative ramifications on the business).
Describe the specific business technical problem or opportunity within your specialization to be studied.
Specifically, what is happening in the smaller than “general” population which is a problem needing
research. Support why the problem is worth researching. A researchable problem is a problem that has
negative consequences for people, places, or things, is important to the academic discipline, and can
be ameliorated to some degree through the generation of new knowledge that may support finding
solutions to the problem. Justify how the stated business (technical) problem relates specifically to your
field of specialization.
The specific business technical problem should link back to the Background. The problem you
formulate should be a current business technical problem that is grounded in the literature of the field
and reflects an analysis and synthesis of peer reviewed articles to explain the business technical
problem using examples and descriptions. “A lack of understanding” or “a lack of knowledge” is not how
to define a business technical problem. What is happening because of the lack of understanding or
knowledge is the problem. The business technical problem must be definable as a situation occurring in
a business with negative ramifications. The problem must be noted in recent (within 3-5 years) business
literature, which is cited in your business technical problem.

Research Purpose
In this section you will formulate a research purpose that contributes knowledge toward resolving or
understanding the business technical problem.
In this section, identify and describe the methodology, approach, and design that you used to
address the research problem or address the need for the study. Include support for why the
chosen methodology and design were appropriate for addressing the research problem or
addressing the need for the study and answering the research question(s).

Provide support that these are appropriate and acceptable for research in your DIT discipline and
your research topic. State, specifically, your specialization in the program. Limit this section to no
more than one page. All references that describe qualitative methodology and designs should be
cited from scholarly, refereed peer-reviewed journal articles (i.e., primary sources). This
information can be written as a single statement in which you state: “The purpose of this
(method/design)” study is to explore (phenomena to be studied, population, geographic
location). Include your target population (i.e., IT business owners, U.S. HR managers in the
Midwest, or employees of mom and pop businesses in the Northeast U.S.). Use the census
regions and divisions of the U.S. to refer to your target area, if it is not the entire country.
The purpose of any research study is to address the need for the study. Here, you will also discuss in
more detail how your study will add to the knowledge base. Focus on addressing the need for the
study to help the wider community of interest and to increase knowledge about the problem under
investigation. Refer to the current literature and research evidence to show that the study is needed to
advance understanding of the problem.

Research Question(s)
In this section, you will refine the business technical problem further into a set of research questions
that define the research objective and connect to existing theory. Each question captures the
purpose and intent of the problem statement.
List the research question, and sub-questions if applicable. Throughout your dissertation, the
research questions must be exactly replicated. Qualitative studies are usually led by one open-
ended “umbrella” or overarching question, with underlying sub-questions; however, in some cases

8
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

there may be more than one umbrella question. If you have more than one research question, the
heading of this section should be plural (i.e., Research Questions).
The following are characteristics of an acceptable research question. Each is (a) a question that can
be answered, (b) based on a literature review that has revealed that this is a research problem that
needs investigation, (c) not yet satisfactorily answered, and (d) clearly identifies all the elements that
the study will investigate: the phenomenon of interest, the population of interest, and the focus on
their actual experiences (thoughts, feelings, etc.). Do not use “yes or no” styled research questions.

In a qualitative research question, words such as variables and relationship among variables do not
easily apply. Qualitative analysis does not measure things, so variable-based or operational
definitions are not relevant. But phenomena or experiences (the stuff of most qualitative analysis)
can be named conceptually, and the research question must ask about those conceptual constructs.
Because qualitative research does not inquire into relationships between variables, words like
"effects," "impact," "influence," “compare,” “difference between” and the like are seldom used.

In general, it is better to write a more narrowly focused question asking precisely what the researcher
is interested in finding out. Although questions about “lived experience of X” are common, the
construct “lived experience” is extremely broad and encompasses a wide range of conscious
cognitive, affective, and behavioral aspects. If one’s interest is correspondingly broad, fine. But if
one’s interest can be more clearly and narrowly focused, that is preferable.
Rationale
In this section you will explain the rationale (justification) for the proposed research, or the need for the
study - the what, in the industry, the practitioner and business literature say remains to be determined.
It is often stated as something that is unknown or has not been previously researched. A lack of
knowledge in and of itself is not important, whereas applying a knowledge gap to an industry practice is.
The knowledge gap in practice should have implications for scholars in the discipline and practitioners
in the field as to why the business technical problem requires new research. Identify, with cited support,
why there is a need for practitioners within a specific industry to address the business technical
problem.

This section should clearly articulate how the study will relate to the current literature. Integrate
multiple sources of linked scholarly research and practitioner publications (outcomes), published
less than 5 years ago, to justify the proposed research. This section need not be lengthy but should
be very clear what the need for the study is and why it should be investigated.
Conceptual Framework (NOT theoretical framework).

In this section you will identify the phenomenon to be studied and you will justify the conceptual
framework. Showing the following will accomplish these objectives:
1) Begin by explaining what concepts from a general theory were used to understand the
phenomenon.
2) Explain the evolution of the concepts of the theory, from seminal author to present day
application. Show that the concepts of the theory have been used by other researchers
investigating the same or similar kinds of problems.
3) Show that the concepts from theory flow logically from the problem. How do these
themes align to address the phenomenon for your identified business technical
problem/opportunity? Because the DIT program does not permit grounded theory
studies, you should not seek to create new theory.
4) Use a parsimonious conceptual framework. Less is more. The DIT dissertation is
designed to be completed in a compressed timeline. Keep this in mind when designing
your study. Focus on a specific, defined problem and align your conceptual framework to
the problem.

9
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

Significance
In this section, you will explain the overall significance of the proposed research and how it adds
scholarly and practitioner value.
Different from the rationale section, here you address the importance of the proposed study, which is
different from the importance of the business technical problem.
A description of the overall significance of the proposed research includes:
• The wider community who have a vested interest in the problem or need for the study.

• A discussion of how important the need for the study is to groups in the wider communities.
Avoid sentimental statements in favor of using evidence that makes your case. If solving
the problem or addressing the need for the study will create knowledge that can be used
by others, then the relevant community is wider, and the significance of the study is
greater. If your study really will not have much importance outside a specific community or
group, then that is its significance.

• Your study will have important implications for knowledge and practice that are bounded
by what you will study and what new knowledge you will generate through the collection
and analysis of data. Project how the findings may add to the body of scholarship based
on the potential results. Suggest how leaders may use these potential findings in a way
that is feasible and realistic.

• Explain how the study will contribute new information to the knowledge base and theory.
Present a justification that the findings make a meaningful contribution to the knowledge
base and to the advancement of the theory (or theories) that provide the framework for
your research. Make a clear case, supported by relevant sources, that your research will
increase understanding of the experience or lived experience, and research population.

• Note that once the study is completed, your significance section (and the remainder of
Chapter 1) will be rewritten in past tense for the final dissertation.

Definitions of Terms
In this section, you will define relevant terms, constructs, and operational definitions for the proposed
research.
Compose a succinct and relevant (to the research) operational definition of selected terms,
constructs, or concepts (often with various meanings), into a complete and integrated definition that
supports the proposed research.
The definitions should clarify the uniqueness of the term regarding its use in the context of your
study or the pertinent literature. Terms need specific definitions from scholarly - practitioner
literature.

Qualitative definitions of terms rely on description and interpretation, not on measurement. Therefore,
the definitions should have two components: a conceptual definition of the phenomena or
experiences being investigated, plus a statement of how the phenomenon will be observed. Some of
the key constructs that you need to define depending on their relevance to your study are feelings
about the experience under investigation, thoughts about the experience, the process of making
sense about the experience, and so on. You also must include definitions of key concepts that
describe your research population and sample. These should be presented in a glossary format, with
the terms in alphabetical order.

Assumptions and Limitations

In this section, you will explain all pertinent assumptions and limitations. These should be relevant to

10
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

your research. They should encompass methodological and real assertions. Do not copy from another
study as another study’s assumptions and limitations.
Assumptions
Your study, like all research, necessarily takes many things for granted. In legal terminology, it
“stipulates” them. This means that everyone agrees without more ado to accept them as true without
going through the tedious business of proving them to be true. But this acceptance does not mean
that assumptions must not be defended; like every other element of your dissertation, they must have
some support. You cannot assume away a gap you are attempting to fill.

Where do assumptions come from? There are several sources of your assumptions. They can be
identified as general methodological assumptions, theoretical assumptions, and topic-specific
assumptions. Qualitative assumptions examples include open and candid responses of participants,
relevancy of the proposed research to scholars and practitioners alike. Bias and researcher error will
be avoided. Research will be conducted ethically.

When specifying your assumptions, particularly the major ones, you should refer to literature where those
assumptions are established or where they are simply “stipulated” by earlier researchers. Any
assumptions (indeed, any design element) that have been accepted in a peer reviewed journal article can
safely be made in a dissertation.

Limitations
In addition to the study’s assumptions, Chapter One also discusses its limitations. There are
basically two forms of limitations you must discuss. The first group comprises any important issues
regarding your research problem which for one reason or another you are not going to investigate.
The second group contains elements of the study that limit its validity or credibility, its capacity for
generalization, and so on–in other words, flaws in the design.
Limitations will always include time constraints, available resources, and experience. Limitations
look at the weaknesses of the proposed study and what the study cannot accomplish. Limitations
should address constraints, undue influence, researcher capabilities for both quantitative and
qualitative. Specifically, for qualitative research, the sample size does not allow the transferability of
findings to a general population.

Organization of the Remainder of the Study

In this section, briefly summarize the contents of Chapter One, and then give the reader an overview of
the content of the remaining four chapters. The more relevant to your topic your summation is, the more
interesting the read. One paragraph is sufficient.

11
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

All research reports, including dissertations, contain reviews of the research and scholarly literature
on the topic. The main purpose of the literature review is to inform the reader what is known about
your research topic, both in terms of research findings and theory.

This section of the Guide describes the main sections required in Chapter Two. Chapter Two should
discuss eight specific points: (1) Introduction; (2) Methods of searching;(2) Theoretical foundation; (3)
Seminal literature; (4) Core literature; (5) Major themes in seminal & core literature; (6) Overview of
research methodologies; (7) Synthesis of the research findings; (8) Conclusion. As a rule, literature
reviews for dissertations should be comprehensive and rigorous meaning that you have included all
the relevant published research and scholarly sources in your literature review. It is expected that your
literature review is comprised of most primary sources from your discipline. In addition, for the core
literature only utilize articles that are more recent, within the past three to five years. If you have a
question about an article, contact your mentor. Blogs and websites are typically not appropriately
placed in your literature review.

Depending upon your research topic, literature reviews will range in the number of resources and
the length of the chapter. For example, many dissertation literature reviews include 75 to 200
sources and the average number of pages is in the mid-thirties. The key to a good literature review
is read until you reach a point of saturation. In other words, you have exhausted the literature
concerning your topic. Once you have completed your review, write the number of pages required
to succinctly support your topic. As a guideline, literature reviews should approximate a minimum of
25 pages in length. If your review contains numerous figures, charts, or other visuals, you may
need to add another page or two.

Introduction
Begin this section with an introduction which states the overall topic of the dissertation and provides
an orienting paragraph or two, so the reader knows what the literature review is going to do.
Describe how the section will be organized (what are the main points and in what order do they
appear?).

Methods of Searching
This section describes how you found the sources that you used for your literature review. Make
sure to identify all the databases you used, as well as search terms. Explain how you might have
combined search terms, or used other search procedures, such as limiting searches to certain
types of publications.
The combined length for these two sections is typically 1-2 pages.

Conceptual Foundation for the Study

In this section of the literature review, cite the major references to support your conceptual
orientation and briefly describe the orientation. Essentially, the “theoretical orientation” or
framework is one’s “point of view” from which one writes the dissertation. Do not blur or blend
theoretical frameworks unless they can be authentically integrated and unless the objective of the
dissertation is best served by their integration. In that case, you will need a careful description of all
the relevant theories in terms of their major references. The choice of concepts to review in the
literature should align specifically with your Chapter 1 Conceptual Framework section. Do not add
to or ignore items in that framework.

If you have blended concepts from multiple theories in your framework, you must show how the
concepts work together and can be validly considered together. In this sense, your “conceptual
framework” can comprise several different theories but be sure that they, or the constructs you

12
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

borrow from them, are compatible (deal with the same material). Cite literature showing that these
concepts work well together.

Often, the framework used in qualitative research has not yet risen to the level of theory, but is known
as a conceptual framework, instead of theoretical. In that case, you can state that. For example, in
human resource management the concept of high-performance work practices has an extensive body
of knowledge but remains a conceptual framework at this time, since the experts have not yet agreed
on how it works. It is not yet theory but is appropriately used for research frameworks.

The length of this section is typically 3-4 pages.

Review of the Literature

The review of the literature encompasses the following elements: (1) Seminal literature; (2) Core
literature; (3) Major themes in seminal and core literature; (4) Overview of research methodologies;
(5) Synthesis of the research findings.

Seminal Literature/Core Literature/Major Themes

The organization of the “Review of the Literature” is important. It can be organized by factors, by
themes, historically or constructs to be addressed, by elements of the theoretical framework, by
elements of the research design, or by another principle. Use APA style sub- headings to organize
the main topics covered in this section. The flow of this section should be apparent to your readers.
All literature review sections follow some “logic,” namely a method of organizing the main points so
that they flow logically and support one another.

The objective is to (a) provide your reader with a synthetic view of the research in the topic you
plan to research further; (b) persuade the reader to accept one’s approach to the study or
research; (c) show that your research is a logical development out of the previous research and is
not heading off in some uncharted and unsupported direction; (d) create a logical and organized
description of the concepts with which you will support your study; and (e) show that you
recognize the significant authors and experts in your field of study, pertinent to your research
project. For example, if you are studying emotional intelligence, a literature review which does not
discuss either Daniel Goleman or Reuven Bar-on will concern readers in your field; it may seem
as though you did not dive deeply into the research in your field. When writing the literature
review, do not simply string one study after another, even if they are well summarized and
evaluated: Follow your organizing principle. Do NOT use author names or citations as headings or
subheadings. Organize thematically and topically.

There will also be literature reviewed to support the methodological choices made in designing the
study. This section of the literature review – in course papers as well as in dissertations – shows
the research from which the key elements of the study or paper have been drawn. The review of
literature should review and present both qualitative and quantitative studies relevant to the topic in
the literature. By following your organizing principle or logic, you will help your reader to follow the
flow of your own thinking about how you approach the study and its elements.

Example

In your Chapter 2, again organize your work around major themes from the literature. Then
deconstruct and synthesize the literature around these primary themes.

Theme 1: xxxx yyyy: Inlcude literature review of articles focused on the following (in this order):
(remember that you are not writing an summary list of the articles, but a literature review)

• Seminal (PRJ/Scholarly)

• Core (PRJ/Scholarly)

13
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

• Support a conclusion

Theme 2: aaaa dddd

• Seminal (PRJ/Scholarly)

• Core (PRJ/Scholarly)

• Support a conclusion

Theme 3: gggg rrrr ttttt

• Seminal (PRJ/Scholarly)

• Core (PRJ/Scholarly)

• Support a conclusion

Theme 4: iiiiiikkkkkklllll

• Seminal (PRJ/Scholarly)

• Core (PRJ/Scholarly)

• Support a conclusion

Whatever organizing principle you choose, follow it strictly and use section sub-headings to keep the
reader oriented. Each section or sub-section should support a conclusion or theme bearing on your
overall answer, solution, or argument. Do not use names of articles or authors as headings.

The combined length for these three sections is typically 10 – 12 pages.

Overview of Research Methodologies

In this section, examine the quality of the research you have reviewed. What are the
methodological strengths and limitations of the works you reviewed? How do those
weaknesses affect your own argument? You will be considering things such the rigor of designs,
size of samples, quality of research instruments, and any other issues related to the quality of
research.

What if there is no controversy about your subject? (Be certain that is the case before asserting it.)
In that case, show the methods you used to comb the literature (including related literature in
closely-related fields) so that the readers can judge whether your claim (that there is no controversy)
is well founded.

At the end of this section, you should have constructed a strong case for why your study will be a
step forward in terms of research rigor.

This section is typically 3-4 pages long.

Synthesis of the Research Findings

This section captures the linking of theory and themes, where your proposed research literally fits into
the theory base and gaps in knowledge. Based upon your review of the literature, demonstrate the gap
in current knowledge.

This is where you pull together the findings and discuss the larger themes, inconsistencies, or relevant
patterns based on the research studies you evaluated. Note that this is not merely a summary of the
literature. You should present something new here that describes the bigger picture of the literature. In

14
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

general, here is where your reader will see what the literature leads you to conclude about your own
question, problem, or thesis; it also sets the stage for a discussion of the research methods in detail
(Chapter Three).

This section will summarize the main points of Chapter Two, showing both the strengths and the
weaknesses in your theoretical orientation and your study’s relationship with the previous research
on the topic, both in content (research findings) and methods (methodology).

This section is typically 3-4 pages long.

Conclusions
This should not be more than two pages, and in general, will summarize the conclusions you have
drawn from the previous literature on your topic or methodology which support your own project.
Provide a concise summary of the research purpose, primary theories, related critical themes, and
the research gap. The summary is of great importance in the dissertation, where this section sums
up Chapter Two and provides a transition into Chapter Three.

15
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY
Every dissertation has a section describing how the researcher carried out the study itself. Of
course, in Chapter One you have already described your basic research design and your research
questions, and in Chapter Two you showed your conceptual framework, how you developed your
topic, the need for the study, the research question, and all the design elements by analyzing the
related literature in your field. Now in Chapter Three, you will describe step-by-step the methods
and procedures used in your study in a way that will enable future researchers to replicate your
study. In fact, make this a working principle to follow in writing Chapter Three: Describe your steps
clearly enough that a reader could follow them like a recipe and reasonably repeat what you did. A
key skill that will help you is to read your work with the mind of a stranger; this will highlight details
that you may have forgotten to describe.

Some of the sections in Chapter Three mirror sections in Chapter One. Do not simply copy and
paste your text from Chapter One here. Instead, rewrite them with a new emphasis. In Chapter One,
you focused on the nature of your study. For instance, your focus in Chapter One on the research
question was how it fit with the need for the study and its significance and how your study met the
need. Chapter One is a conceptual and introductory presentation. Here in Chapter Three, your
emphasis is on methods and procedures, so when you discuss the research question, you will focus
on the kinds of data the question requires for its answer, among other things, and how your
procedures are designed to collect and analyze those kinds of data. While the actual wording of the
research question should be the same, the surrounding discussion will vary in emphasis.

In shorthand, Chapter One describes why the research question was asked, and Chapter Three
describes how the research question was answered.

Chapter Three has, at least, the following elements: 1) the purpose of the study; 2) the research
question; 3) the research design; 4) the target population and participant selection; 5) the
procedures you used to conduct the study; 6) the instruments used to collect the data; and 8) ethical
considerations. The final section of Chapter Three is the chapter summary.

Introduction

For this section, simply repeat the purpose statement and open-ended research question (or
questions) exactly as you have it in Chapter One. Describe, explain, and justify the purpose and
organization of chapter 3 including the linkage to key topics in the scholarly research. This section is
ideal to concisely present the phenomenon, research questions with the logic flow, purpose, and
organization of chapter 3.

Design and Methodology

In this section, assess the value of the research design and methodology and justify it with several
scholarly research sources. Align the research design to the research questions.
Like the previous section, you already outlined this in Chapter One from a conceptual standpoint.
Here you can rewrite much of that material for the readers’ convenience, adding in greater clarity and
detail, but your focus must be a concrete description of your design.

In this section, you want your reader to have a clear idea of how your design was used to answer the
research question(s).

Review the Acceptable Methods and Topics for DIT document for guidance on approved
dissertation methods.

16
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

Participants and Setting

In this section, again, you will expand on information presented more cursorily in Chapter One.
Before getting into details, please refresh your memory about the differences between the population
and the sample. For this discussion, we are going to use the terms loosely.

Statisticians use the terms to refer to groups of data, not people, because we work with and analyze
data, not actual persons. But because the data refer to people, more loosely the terms often refer
to the people from whom the data (numbers in the statistical world) come from. In that sense, the
population is the larger group of people who experience the general problem or issue that generates
the need for the study.

Participants

In this section, you will explain, defend, and rationalize the selection criteria for participants, the
sampling strategy, saturation, recruitment (participation) procedures, and any inclusion or exclusion
criteria. Be sure to integrate recent and relevant scholarly justification for all elements of the research
design.
Describe the sample, consistently with the description of the population. This means simply that the
researcher specifies the features of the sample that reflect the larger population.
Representativeness is a key issue, especially in quantitative work, but sometimes also in qualitative
studies. If you utilized a sampling frame for your research, you must describe it in this section.
Identify the range of the number of participants you planned to include in the research and provide
a rationale for the range. The acceptable rationale must include reference to the need for the study
and question, showing that the sample size will provide an adequate depth of information to answer
that question meaningfully. Support your rationale with sources from the methodological literature.

Carefully describe the inclusion and exclusion criteria for your sample. Note that exclusion criteria are
not merely the “opposite” of inclusion criteria. Exclusion criteria are those characteristics that would
disqualify an otherwise qualified person from participating.

Do not describe the actual obtained sample in this section. For example, you do not want to report your
obtained sample size, how many males and females you had, and so on. The actual description of your
obtained sample is presented in Chapter Four.

For researchers needing more information on describing the population and sample in this chapter, note
the following:
Qualitative designs are not usually preoccupied with matters of external validity. Their purpose is
different—to achieve rich and textured knowledge about people’s experience of some
phenomenon or issue. As a result, qualitative analysis focuses more narrowly and deeply on
“information-rich” participants, rather than on a larger and broader sample representative of large
populations. Qualitative designs are rarely generalizable.

Case studies are rich in information about the case issue inquired about. Because a “case” is a
“bounded system”, the case boundaries (identifying characteristics) need to be clearly specified in
this section. Identifying a larger “target population” is typically unnecessary in a case study: by
definition, a case study is interested in a particular case (or a number of instances of a particular
case), not in the universe of possibly related cases.

All qualitative researchers wrestle with sample selection. On the one hand, they want
information-rich participants who can report on their experiences. On the other hand, they need
their sample to faithfully represent the underlying phenomena or issues or case or problem.

Be sure to identify the sampling method and describe the procedure of how you selected the
sample. Include your steps taken for recruitment of participants. Use standard terminology
throughout the dissertation and be consistent. Be sure your terminology is congruent with your

17
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

methodology and approach. If you used a non-conventional technique or procedure, in this section
you should detail it and discuss the rationale and how the procedure or technique is consistent
with your research question and design (with references to support the technique).
Before moving ahead, let us be clear about the distinction between “methods” and “procedures.”
Purposive (purposeful) sampling would be a method. In describing how you plan to carry out that
method, you describe your procedures. So simply saying that you will obtain a sample by doing
“snowball sampling” still requires you to describe what steps you will take to accomplish that.

After describing your method of sampling, describe your procedures for carrying that method out.
Describe carefully all the steps you took to create your sample. Each procedure— identifying
potential participants, contacting that pool, recruiting, or inviting their participation, and organizing
your sample—requires its own procedural description (a recipe clear enough that others can
reasonably repeat your work). In this section, “organizing the sample” includes a variety of steps,
including how the inclusion and exclusion variables or criteria were measured or identified. Even in
small-sample qualitative studies, these points must be covered carefully. Indeed, in qualitative
studies, these procedures can become deceptively complex.

Setting

Some of the details that must be included in this section are the recruitment site (de- identified to
protect participant confidentiality), how potential participants contacted you to indicate their
willingness to participate, how the participants were screened to make sure they met the inclusion
criteria, but not exclusion criteria, and how you proceeded once eligibility was determined. The
sampling procedure ends once the participant provides informed consent (if required). Be specific
as to the setting and location for all interviews., . Are the interviews conducted via phone? VOIP?
Zoom? Face to face? Use the most confidential and appropriate method available. Do not video
your participants unless there is a valid reason to do so which has been approved by your
committee and the IRB.

Analysis of the Research Questions

This section features any instruments you will use to collect data of any kind. List your guiding
interview questions if you used them. Provide scholarly support and alignment for all the interview
questions, your framework, and findings from the literature review. Detail how the data to be
collected from the instruments will inform the answers to the research questions. Provide an in-
depth description of the interview protocol.

*Note: Put any protocols (for artifact collection and analysis) in Appendices.
For its purposes, consider the term instrument broadly. In many forms of qualitative inquiry, the
researcher is considered an instrument, because the researcher is the data collector. In some
studies, actual instruments (cameras, tape recording devices, biofeedback equipment, etc.) may be
used to collect data. Make a list of each instrument (including yourself) that you will use in the
collection of data.
While qualitative studies can use various instruments to assist with data collection, such as audio
recorders, the primary instrument is the researcher. This should be discussed in a sub-section titled
“Role of the Researcher.” Use first person when discussing yourself (Avoid writing about yourself in
the 3rd person – use “I” or “my” as per APA rule 3.09.).

Your personal interactions as a data collection instrument would include such methods as
interviews; open-ended conversation; field notes, naturalistic, or participant observations; and so
on. In these cases, the role of the researcher includes, at least, the following information: (a) what
did the researcher do with the participants? (b) how was the researcher qualified by experience,
training and supervision, or study to do those things? and (c), if the researcher was unqualified or
under-qualified, what did he or she do to obtain the necessary skills?

For instance, if you conducted personal interviews, you need to describe how you were qualified to

18
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

do such interviewing. Describe your experience doing so, the training or supervised practice you
have received in doing so in preparation for this research, books or articles on techniques you have
studied or trainings you have attended, and so on. Often your previous work training will contain
such experience but analyze your experience critically to be sure.

If the design of your study requires you to return to the participants (to validate initial interpretations
of the data, for instance, or for a second round of interviews), describe any new instruments or “role
of the researcher” which will be required for that round.

Expert Review Panel

Before your actual data collection began, you must have had an expert review of your interview
questions. If there was an expert review, describe the process, such as the number of reviewers,
their (de-identified) credentials, and the general feedback the reviewers gave. Ultimately, include a
statement that indicates that the expert reviewers approved the interview questions.
When contacting experts for participation in the expert review, the following protocols are
recommended:
• Learner introduction (your Capella degree program and specialization and request for the
expert to participate).
• The purpose of the study and target population.
• The research questions and interview questions (remind the expert that they are not to
answer the interview questions).
• What is expected of the expert – answering questions such as:

1. Based upon the purpose of the study and research questions, are the questions on the
questionnaire likely to generate information to answer the research question?

2. Are the participants likely to find any of the questions on the questionnaire (the nature of the
question or specific wording) objectionable? If so, why? What changes would you recommend?

3. Were any of the questions on the questionnaire difficult to comprehend? If so, why? What changes
would you recommend?

4. Feel free to provide any additional thoughts about the questionnaire, which were not covered in
questions 1 through 3, above.

Test Run

Before doing data collection, please do a test run. This means you practice using your expert reviewed
and edited interview protocol with a person. Run the interview as though it were real. Use a trusted
friend, your mentor, a co-worker, etc. and have a practice interview. You will likely want to make a few
edits based on how well the questions elicited responses or did or did not confuse your practice
participant. Once completed, notify your mentor, and note that you have done this in your Chapter 4.
Please note that the test run is sometimes referred to as field test. Please check the Capella IRB
website for more details about test runs.

Credibility and Dependability

In this section, you will construct a detailed description of the process of assessing, comparing, and
justifying the dependability and credibility of the data collection construct. Explain dependability
and credibility (including any triangulation techniques for a case study design) as it relates to future
use.

Explain the unique role of interviewer as the instrument, addressing credibility and accuracy
concerns. An issue for qualitative researchers to cover involves the question of researcher bias and

19
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

previous knowledge. You should identify the previous knowledge you have about the question you
are studying and any biases or expectations you had about what you would learn from your
participants. Then you need to discuss your procedures for suspending the biases. This requires
familiarity with the methodological literature associated with your chosen methodological approach
case study, or generic qualitative and methodological model. Citing textbooks is insufficient
preparation for this, when citing references cite primary sources.

Data Collection
Data collection typically begins once informed consent has been given. Describe in detail the
following:
• Provide a synopsis on the specifics and mechanics of your proposed data collection protocol.
• Number of proposed interviews.
• Determining saturation.
• Details on field test.
• One on one in-depth interviews.
• Method of interview (face to face; VOIP, phone only).
• Will you record the interviews? Who will transcribe them? How will you deidentify the
participants in transcripts? (Do not video record without specific IRB permission). If you need
video recording (i.e., observations will matter), you must justify that in Chapter 3.
• Structure and interview question flow.
• Link the interview questions with:
o Major themes (chapter 2) and
o Research questions (chapter 1)
o Triangulation for case study only (identify 2 sources of data collection)

Data Analysis
This section describes the procedures you used to analyze your data. Do not report your data in
this section. You will do this in Chapter Four. This section describes how you analyzed the data,
and Chapter Four describes the findings because of the data analysis.

Qualitative analysis follows well-described steps, and the type of data being analyzed determines
the kinds of analysis that are done. Select and justify the best technique based on the needs of the
research and research questions, available data, and scholarly author's recommendations. Discuss
in this section the type(s) of data that were obtained. Interviews yield a kind of data different from field
observations, photograph or videotape analysis, archived record data, journals, poems or novels,
letters, historical documents, cultural artifacts, and so on. Different data types may require different
analysis methods and procedures.

Next, discuss how the data were prepared for analysis. For example, an interview audiotape needs to
be transcribed to be usable. How was it done (onto electronic media or paper) and who did it (the
researcher often does his or her own transcriptions as a way to enter fully into understanding the
data, but perhaps a transcriber did it)? Did the researcher keep master copies or not? Will there be
working copies? How many? Was software (e.g., word processing programs or commercially
available qualitative analytic programs) used? What versions? Include member checking
procedures in the analysis section as well.

Next, discuss how the data will be initially analyzed. Again, each type of data and each
methodological approach (e.g., generic qualitative research or case study) and each model (e.g.,
Percy, Kostere and Kostere’s model of generic qualitative research, Braun and Clarke’s use of

20
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

thematic analysis, etc.) will have standard procedures recommended for data analysis.
Information used to present qualitative methodology must be referenced to primary sources (i.e.,
not textbooks and not as referenced by another dissertation or research article). Explain and
clarify the establishment of coding structure in alignment with the conceptual framework. The
coding structure should be driven by themes discovered in the review of the literature in chapter
2.

When there are multiple data types, describe not only the procedures (step by step) for analyzing
each type of data, but the procedures for combining the results from each separate analysis.

When you have finished these descriptions, read them with a skeptical eye: do they give enough detail
that your reader could follow your steps like a recipe? Try to leave nothing about which your readers
must guess.

Ethical Considerations
In this section, discuss the ethical considerations you addressed in your study. You can mention
the procedures you covered in the Protection of Participants section earlier in the chapter, but here
explain fully why you might have taken certain steps. For example, if your sample was vulnerable,
explain why you chose certain safeguards to protect your sample. If you had any conflicts of
interest, disclose those in this section and explain what you did to mitigate those. In this section,
indicate that your dissertation received approval from the Capella University IRB, as well as any
other IRBs or agenciesthat might have approved your study.

In this section, also describe the procedures used to protect the participants, such as how informed
consent was obtained, whether there might have been safeguards in place in case of re-traumatization
or to protect vulnerable populations and so on. You should not include your informed consent
document or other similar documents as Appendices in your dissertation.
• Explain, in detail, privacy, confidentiality and data security concerns.
• Compare and contrast with like scholarly research.
• Address risk in comparison to benefits.
• Avoid vulnerable populations.
• Explain the ethical conduct of research referring to IRB requirements and the findings from
the Belmont Report.

Resource
Refer to the Institutional Review Board website for guidance on ethical procedures and practices.

Summary
Summarize the main points of Chapter Three and provide a transition to Chapter Four.

21
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

CHAPTER 4. RESULTS
The dissertation has a section describing the results of the data analysis, a presentation of the data
collected and analyzed, and the findings and results of the study. Chapter Four describes the results
of your study and provides a presentation of the data collected, a presentation of the results of the
data analysis, and the findings of the study. Chapter Four has, at least, the following elements: the
study and the researcher; description of the sample; a brief description of how the methodological
approach (e.g., case study, generic descriptive qualitative) was applied to the process of data
analysis; the presentation of data and results; and a summary.

Readers will note that the text here is written to reflect an outline of Chapter Four of the
dissertation. Since this Chapter represents the research that has been conducted, Chapter Four
should be written in past tense.

Introduction
In this section of Chapter Four, the researcher should provide the reader with a brief introduction
stating the purpose of the chapter, a description of how Chapter Four fits into the overall
dissertation, and the organization or main sections of the chapter. This introduction should set
the stage for the remainder of the chapter, as well as allow the reader to gain an understanding
of the logical flow of how this chapter relates to both the preceding chapters and the following
chapter. Information about the research design, methodological assumptions, or any other
material covered previously in Chapters One, Two, or Three should not be included in this
Introduction. The key issue to remember this introduces Chapter Four, not the entire dissertation.

Data Collection Results

This section of Chapter Four consists of a detailed descriptionof all sources of data and the
participant sample ultimately used in the study.
Start with a one (1) paragraph transition. Let the reader know the details of this section (each level 2
heading) and importance of the study. Reference the major methodologists –not textbooks. Then
highlight the data collection components (this will link back to triangulation).
Research Protocol (level 2)
Here, define the research protocol you prepared for planning the entire research process that outlines
the major steps used in conducting the research activities, defining contingencies, and documenting
the responses during the interview process.
Case or Phenomenon Context (level 2)
Describe the case or phenomenon context set in chapter 3. Now remind the reader exactly what
the boundaries of the case or nature of the phenomenon included; note any changes or modifications.
Interview Participants (level 2)
In this section discuss how participants were ultimately recruited: sponsors, snowballing, et al.
Describe the profile of the participants, indicate how interview participants did or did not meet the
inclusion criteria, or to what degree the mix of background experiences related to the study’s purpose.
Details on how the research was conducted, data collected at the location from participants that
observed/participated in the phenomenon under investigation.
The description of the sample should include demographic information about all the participants in the
study. In qualitative research, because generalization is seldom the objective, the description of the
actual participants is more important than a general description of a group. Be certain to include all
information regarding the participants that is pertinent to the study itself. While most descriptions of the
participants will include such information as age, gender, ethnicity, educational status, and area of
residence, some studies—due to the nature of the research question—might include additional

22
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

information. Enough detail about the participants must be described to answer the research question.
It is important while offering the reader a detailed description of the sample, to also maintain the
confidentiality carefully and to conceal the identities of the participants in the study. It is essential
that the participants are not identifiable by any individual reading the manuscript. Be careful not to
allow details of setting or context identify any of the participants. For example, describing an
interviewee as “a professor of psychology at a local university” could potentially identify the
participant if the meaning of “local” became known somehow and if there were only one psychology
department in that locality. In contrast, information that the participant is a “tenured professor in a
small Midwestern liberal arts college,” if it is very important in understanding the results, would not
unduly risk revealing the participant’s identity because there are many “small Midwestern liberal arts
colleges.”
In this section, describe the procedures used to protect the participants, such as how informed
consent was obtained, whether there might have been safeguards in place in case of re-
traumatization or to protect vulnerable populations and so on.

Resource
Refer to the Institutional Review Board website for guidance on ethical procedures and practices.

This section also should describe, along with the sample participants, other participants, or near-
participants who for any reason withdrew or were withdrawn from the study, along with the
reasons for their withdrawal. Such information bears on the meaning of the data found and can
be discussed for its implications in Chapter Five. For example, in a case study with 15
participants, if three withdrew during the data collection period, the reasons for their withdrawal
might bear directly upon the interpretation of the results.

Finally, describe any other aspects of or influences on the sample participants and their
participation that might bear on the findings. These could include, for example, interrupted
interviews, deviations from the planned interactions with the participants, happenings in the context
or setting which bear on the findings (e.g., an unexpected lay-off occurring in a factory during field
observations of a work group were being made), and so on. Reflect carefully on all factors that
could have influenced what was discovered about your participants and report it here.
Interview Setting (level 2)
Describe the specific interviewing setting, such as VOIP, face-to-face and where, public library, on-
site conference room, et al. This discussion must be precise, as to location, recording devices, how
participants were informed, unexpected distractions, etc.
Semi-Structured Interviews (level 2)
A semi-structured interview protocol was prepared to conduct the interviews. A semi-structured
interview provides a frame of reference for the participant and leaves it open-ended, to solicit a
response that was relevant to the participants (this should link to chapter 3 and the original list of
interview questions in an appendix).
Test Run
This does not require IRB approval, the data is not used in the study, and it is a practice session.
One-to-One Interviews (level 2)
Provide the number of one-on-one interviews that you conducted over what timeframe. Describe the
interview flow and reactions of participants. A semi-structured interview guide and open-ended
interview questions were administered to allow for a genuine and natural conversation with the
participants. For example, did questions need to be restated to focus some of the participants when
the conversation digressed. Indicate approximate length of interviews. A table here or figure is very
useful, identifying each interview by a created label (e.g. A, B, C, A1, B2, … etc.) and sort by case
boundary (ies).

23
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

Direct Observations (face-to-face) (level 2)

Direct observations of the phenomenon (Yin, 2018) provide an additional source of evidence, confirm,
challenge, and expand on interview questions responses as detailed by participants. For example,
on-site at a business to interview participants and observe the business technical
problem/opportunity (phenomenon) being studied.
Documentation, Social Media, Artifacts (level 2)
Other forms of data sources can be examined to generate insights in the research study. According
to Yin (2018), internal and external documentation can provide a valuable source of evidence to
corroborate and support the facts generated by different sources. Documentation can be reports,
process maps, et al. Next, physical, or cultural artifacts can be relevant and add insight.
Social media can be another point of view. Texts, email, blogs, chat rooms on social media sites, all
have possibilities of contributing additional points of view. When using social media great care must
be taken to not become overwhelmed with the volume of data and provide a clear link to how and
what context the media was created. How does the social media information flow with the other
evidence in your study? Link to your research protocols? Social media is opinion within the context of
the phenomenon, rarely with documented support.
Saturation (level 2)
Data saturation represents the point of data replication and redundancy in participant responses
when “little new information appears to be forthcoming from additional instances” (Yin, 2018). Here
you will indicate at which number of interviews you saw this happen; expect this to happen between
the 10th and 15th participants. The more sophisticated the research phenomenon, the longer it will
take to hit saturation. Practical indications? Please plan on a minimum of 12 interviews plus the field
test. The more interviews completed, the greater substance to the credibility of your research results.

Data Analysis and Results

In this section of Chapter Four, provide a description of how the methodological approach was
applied to the process of data analysis and how the data analysis was conducted.

Chapter Three presented the reader with a thorough description of the research design and
methodological approach; it should not be repeated here. Instead, focus on how the analytic methods
of the selected methodological approach (ethnography, phenomenology, etc.) were applied to the
raw data. However, in this section, the aim is not to discuss the model (that was done conceptually
in Chapters One and Two and methodological in Chapter Three), but to describe the analysis
procedures briefly but clearly.

Discuss how the steps of the protocol were carried out. In performing the analysis, were there
differences or departures from the protocol described in Chapter Three? What were they and why did the
researcher make those changes? Was it necessary to return to IRB and if so, what happened?
Explain.

Theming and coding are essential requiring the use of an approved hermeneutic textual software such
as QSR NVivo for coding of the final data. Here you describe the coding process you will use.
According to Yin (2018), the five phases of analysis include: (a) compiling a database, (b)
disassembling relevant data passages into manageable parts, (c) reassembling the data into emerging
patterns or groupings, (d) interpreting the meaning of these findings, and (e) concluding what just
unfolded. This logic will be applied in organizing the database and looking for dominant themes by
using the following process:

Here you describe the step by step process you used. Such as:

• Upload the transcript documents into the software

24
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

• Review and familiarize with the data transcripts

• Code the relevant passages to the nodes beginning with the preliminary Codes created in chapter
3

• Explore each node category to identify similar groupings, subgroupings, and patterns expressed
in the data to look for meaning

• As the process unfolds, the coding structure will be modified and organized to reflect the
emerging themes that came from the data collection.

• The final coding structure reflected shows the evolution from preliminary coding structure to final
coding with more depth expressed through child and grandchild nodes.

Finally, if any problems arose during data analysis, these should be described here; for example, if
data were lost or somehow contaminated, those events and processes would be described here,
including any attempts to correct the problem, reconstruct the data, re- collect them, etc. In Chapter
Five, these issues can be analyzed and discussed for their implications about the findings.
Following the discussion of how the data were analyzed, the researcher presents the data collected
and the results of the analysis. This section is the heart of Chapter Four and will be presented in a
format consistent with the methodological approach chosen for the study. The summary outline
above can be consulted for a conventional structure for data and results presentations in the major
qualitative approaches. Build this section according to the appropriate format above, or according to
data presentation models found in similar qualitative dissertations on similar research problems.

For example, in the case study approach, data and findings are presented in terms of a description
of the case as a whole, followed by the technical operations of direct interpretation, categorical
aggregation, within-case analysis, across case analysis, and finally the interpretive phase. In this
section, data and findings should be presented clearly, but with sufficient detail to allow readers to
follow the analysis and to refer back to the raw data (words of the participants, field notes, etc.) to
find support for the findings. The description should be rich and detailed. Whenever possible, give
examples in the words of the participants to support a finding. It is not necessary or appropriate to
provide every word from every participant.

The researcher’s duty is to “digest” the raw data and to present them in a form that gives readers
access to the results without their having to read all the data themselves. At the same time, the
researcher finds representative quotations which “sum up” or exemplify the theme or pattern
discovered across many responses. Each quotation should support a particular result or finding.
Every quotation should be clearly related to one or more findings of a theme or pattern and should
represent other responses which may not be quoted. In that sense, while being unique units of data
themselves, the quotations in Chapter Four also serve as exemplars of a set of data (other words,
phrases, sentences, or passages) which can be found in the transcripts, notes, and other forms of
raw data.

There are two widely used methods of organizing this presentation of the analysis: the research-
question method of organization and the by-participant method. Others can be equally useful, and
researchers may use organizational models found in previously published studies of a similar nature.
The “research-method” question organizes this section in large sub-sections devoted to each of the
research sub-questions. The “by-participant” organizational model reports the various stages of
analysis for each participant, before abstracting and reporting on the wider, more universal themes,
structures, or universal issues found across all the participants’ data. Both presentations must set
the stage for a clear set of answers to the research question, which will be summarized in the final
section of Chapter Four.

All qualitative approaches build their results from the intensely particular (words, observations,
field notes) toward the general (descriptions of patterns or themes found across many instances

25
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

of the data). In performing the analysis, this inductive process is followed, moving again from the
data themselves up to higher and higher levels of clusters of similar statements, to thematic
abstractions from those clusters, up yet further toward interpretation statements abstracting a
central meaning of a cluster of themes or patterns. In this section (presentation of the data and
results), however, just the opposite is conventionally found: the researcher reports the general
themes or patterns of meaning found in the data, supported by representative quotations showing
the more abstract theme. Again, not all the possible quotations from transcripts or field notes
supporting a theme are presented; only the few that best exemplify the sense of that theme. Nor
does the entire mass of raw data (transcripts, etc.) need to be appended to the dissertation.
Instead, many authors create tables of themes and representative quotations for each theme and
attach those as appendixes. Consult with your mentor and Committee members on the inclusion
of mass data, tables, etc.

Chapter Four reports the process of abstraction—moving from the particulars of the data upwards
toward themes, patterns of themes, and abstract meaning-statements. This is a process of
interpretation. In Chapter Four, interpretations of the data are presented, aimed ultimately at
answering the research question. The last stage of the analysis (“lessons learned” in case
studies, “universal essences or structures” in phenomenology, etc.) represents the final
interpretation of one’s data.

The results presented in Chapter Four (which include interpretations of the meaning of the data) will
themselves be interpreted in Chapter Five by being related to issues raised in another authors’
work. For this reason, Chapter Four goes no further than presenting the sample, the analysis, and
the results of the analysis in the form of answers to the research question. It remains for the
researcher in Chapter Five, to put the overall study and those answers into the larger context of the
wider body of literature on the topic. Thus, the presentation of the Results should focus only on
answering the research question(s).

Themes, patterns, and descriptions of the results should be presented in the context of the
research question and sub-questions. A collection of themes and meanings found in the data which
cannot rationally be connected to the research question(s) is meaningless, no matter how
interesting it might be, and should be left out. The researcher’s creativity in presenting the data and
the results is welcome; but the objective is always to present a clear and coherent answer to the
research question, supported by the analysis and interpretation of the data. Likewise, no answer to
the research question(s) should be offered unless it is clearly based on the analysis, and unless
supporting data can be presented.

Summary
Present a summary of the findings or conclusions. In short, sum up the answers to the research
question and sub-questions here, in such a way that the reader can smoothly make the transition to
the full discussion of the meaning of the answers in the context of previous research as well as this
study’s design in Chapter Five.

Like any summary, this should be brief and recapitulate the main points of Chapter Four. It should
not introduce anything new, add anything to the previous material, speculate or theorize, draw
conclusions, or reflect on the larger meaning of the results: all this is the task of Chapter Five.
Rather, tell the reader what the answers to your research questions are and write a transition
paragraph moving the readers along to Chapter Five, where the results will be discussed and
interpreted.

Supplement: Description of Qualitative Approaches

26
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

Choose below the research design approach that you used in your dissertation. In addition to the
general Chapter 4 information presented in this guide, refer to the additional guidelines to follow when
preparing Chapter 4.

GENERIC QUALITATIVE INQUIRY RESEARCH

Introduction

1. Generic qualitative inquiry research studies may also include a brief restatement of
the research question.
2. After introducing the chapter, include a sub-section on the researcher, including at least
the following information:
3. The researcher’s interest in the phenomenon to be investigated,
4. The researcher’s background, training, and experience in conducting the research
approach,
5. The role the researcher played in data collection and analysis, and
6. A discussion of significant effects the researcher may have had on the data at any stage
of the project.
Description of the Sample

This section for descriptive studies will describe the following:

1. The primary informants (participants); include full descriptions of them, as well as

demographic information, size of the final sample, and so on.
2. Any other data sources that were accessed, including descriptions of external
informants, data bases, records, documents, and any other source of information.
3. Any participants who dropped from the study and why, as well as any other relevant data
sources which could not be accessed and why.

Data Analysis

This section in generic qualitative inquiry research studies provides the following information:

1. Describes how the Generic Qualitative Inquiry research model was applied to the process
of data analysis. (Focus on how the analytic method of generic qualitative research was
applied to the raw data.)
2. Describes any differences or departures from the protocol described in Chapter
Three.
3. Describes any problems arising during data collection or analysis.
Data and Results of Analysis
Use the procedures or steps appropriate to the methodological model you are following.

Inductive Analysis

Inductive analysis is data driven and does not attempt to fit the data into any preexisting categories.
The researcher sets aside all pre-understandings. The data collected from each participant
(interviews, observations, open-ended questionnaire, etc.) is analyzed individually. Once the data
from all participants has been analyzed, the repeating patterns and themes from all participants are

27
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

synthesized together into a composite synthesis, which attempts to interpret the meanings and/or
implications regarding the question under investigation.

Step-By-Step Analysis

1. Review and familiarize yourself with the data collected from each participant (interviews,
journals, field notes, records, and documents). Read the documents and highlight intuitively
any sentences, phrases, or paragraphs that appear to be meaningful. During this process,
the researcher immerses him/herself in each participant’s data individually.
2. Review the highlighted data and use your research question to decide if the highlighted
data is related to your question. Some information in the transcript may be interesting, but
not relate to your question.
3. Eliminate all highlighted data that are not related to your question, however, start a
separate file to store unrelated data. You may want to come back and reevaluate this data in
the future.
4. Take each set of data and code or name the data.
5. Cluster the sets of data that are related or connected in some way and start to
develop patterns.
6. Data that corresponds to a specific pattern is identified and placed with the
corresponding pattern, and direct quotes are taken from the data (transcribed
interviews, field notes, documents, etc.) to elucidate the pattern.
7. Take all the patterns and look for the emergence of overreaching themes. This
process involves combining and clustering the related patterns into themes.
8. After all the data has been analyzed, arrange the themes to correspond with the
supporting patterns. The patterns are used to elucidate the themes.
9. For each theme, the researcher needs to write a detailed analysis describing the scope
and substance of each theme. (Complete this process for each participants’ data).
10. Each pattern should be described and elucidated by supporting quotes from the data.
11. Then combine the analysis of data for all participants including patterns and themes that
are consistent across the participants’ data.
12. Finally, the data is synthesized together to form a composite synthesis of the
question under inquiry. (Percy et al., 2015)
For more information on generic qualitative inquiry research, see the following sources.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Caelli, K., Ray, L., & Mill, J. (2003). 'Clear as mud': Toward greater clarity in generic qualitative
research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(2), 1–24.
Percy, W., Kostere, K. & Kostere, S. (2015). Generic qualitative research in psychology. The Qualitative
Report, 20(2), 76-85. http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR20/2/percy5.pdf

28
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

CASE STUDY
Introduction
1. Case studies may also include a brief description of the background of the study, the
relevant contexts of the case, and what preparations were made to enter the field.
2. A brief re-statement of the research question is also appropriate.

After introducing the chapter, include a sub-section on the researcher, including at least the following
information:
1. The researcher’s interest in the phenomenon to be investigated,
2. The researcher’s background, training, and experience in conducting the research
approach,
3. The role the researcher played in data collection and analysis, and
4. A discussion of significant effects the researcher may have had on the data at
any stage of the project.
Description of the Sample

For case studies, describe the following:

1. The primary informants (participants); include full descriptions of them, as well as
demographic information, size of the final sample, and so on.
2. Any other data sources that were accessed, including descriptions of external
informants, data bases, records, documents, and any other source of information.
3. Any participants who dropped from the study and why, as well as any other
relevant data sources which could not be accessed and why.

Data Analysis
In general, describe how the case study methodological approach was ultimately carried out in this
study.

Also describe what different data analysis tools and procedures were used for various kinds of data.
1. How context and setting were analyzed.
2. Problems with the analysis should also be outlined, although their impact will not
be discussed here, but in Chapter Five section.
Data and Results of Analysis

1. A detailed description of the case as a whole and of its setting(s) and contexts,
creating a rich and textured picture of the case and its settings; this gives a sense
of the whole.

2. Direct interpretation (of single instances): describe single instances which seem
meaningful considering the research question. Do not (yet) look for clusters of
meanings or multiple instances of one meaningful theme.
3. Categorical aggregation: At this stage, collections of meaning-rich instances from
the data are aggregated into categories of meaning (themes).
4. Within-case analysis: Describe themes and patterns of meaning which emerged from
the data and illustrate the connections between or among the themes. These
themes and patterns should be described and developed using verbatim passages

29
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

and direct quotes from the data to elucidate each pattern and theme. (The data from
the case itself are used, without being compared yet with data from other cases; this
is within-case analysis).
(Many case studies examine several instances [multiple cases]. If so, repeat the first four steps for
each instance [case]. Then move to the final two steps. If only one instance [single case], proceed
to steps 5 and 6.)
5. Thematic synthesis: Synthesize the results of the thematic analyses across multiple
cases (across case analysis) or within the case using verbatim passages and direct
quotes from the data to elucidate each theme as well as present the interpretations of
the integrated meaning of all the cases in the study.
6. Develop and present naturalistic generalizations of the results of the interpretive phase of
the study; these consist of the “lessons learned” from the case study.
Presentation of Data and Results of Analysis Using Thematic Analysis for Case Study
1. A thematic analysis can also be used to conduct an analysis of the qualitative data
in some types of case study.
2. Read the data transcript and underline any sentences, phrases, or paragraphs that
appear to be meaningful. Do not make any interpretations yet!
3. Review the underlined data and decide if the underlined data is relevant to the
research question. (Some information in the transcript may be interesting but does
not relate to the research question)
4. Cross out all data that is not related to the research question.
5. From the underlined sentences that are left, following the elimination of data not related
to the question, take each underlined sentence or groups of sentences (expressions
or meaning units) that focus on one idea and name or code each.
6. Cluster the sets of data (expressions or meaning units) that are related or
connected in some way and start to develop patterns. Now you start the
interpretation, but only with the understanding that the codes or the patterns may
shift and change during the process of analysis.
7. After you have developed your patterns, title (name) each pattern.
8. Write a brief description of each pattern. Use direct quotations from the
transcript to show the reader how the patterns emerged from the data.
9. Take all the patterns and look for the emergence of overreaching themes. This
process involves combining and clustering the related patterns into themes.
10. After all the data has been analyzed, arrange the themes to correspond with the
supporting patterns. The patterns are used to elucidate the themes.
11. For each theme, the researcher needs to write a detailed analysis describing the scope
and substance of each theme. (Complete this process for each participants’ data)
12. Each pattern should be described and elucidated by supporting quotes from the data.
Then the research develops a synthesis of the participant’s data combining the
patterns and themes to represent a whole of the experience under inquiry. (Within
case analysis)
13. Then combine the analysis of data for all participants including patterns and
themes that are consistent across the participants’ data. (Cross case analysis)
14. Finally, the data is synthesized together to form composite synthesis of the
question under inquiry.

30
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

15. Develop a statement of the Lessonto be Learned.

16. We should not see focus groups without Faculty Chair or Associate Faculty Chair
approval.
17. Do not use word clouds.
For more information on the case study approach, please see the following sources.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.

31
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS
It is not unusual for learners to find that writing Chapter Five can be challenging. Having carefully
avoided injecting speculation or reflection into the previous sections, and assiduously sticking to the
previous research to support their claims, now they find they must become transparent as the
author of their work. In Chapter Five, writers must evaluate their own work and provide personal
insight into and interpretation of their study’s results. This does not mean, of course, that informal
writing is now appropriate. But within the constraints of scholarly writing, the learner now presents
what the study means to him or her, and more widely, what he or she thinks it means to their field, to
the line of previous research, and to the communities interested in the topic. (Note: In APA style,
avoid referring to yourself in 3rd person (e.g., “this researcher”. If you must refer to yourself, use 1st
person singular. If possible, avoid referring to yourself at all. Passive voice is acceptable in scientific
writing, when necessary. See the Doctoral Publications Guidebook (APA 7th ed.) for guidance.

In general, however, Chapter Five must accomplish two primary objectives:

1. It should assess whether the dissertation addresses the need that precipitated the study
(and how well); in doing so, the learner should interpret the study’s results considering
existing findings in the field.
2. It should recommend directions for future study.
To accomplish the first objective, Chapter Five addresses and discusses what the study means: Did
the study answer the research question, and what are its implications for the research question, the
previous literature, and the wider communities of interest? Whereas Chapter Four was limited to
simply presenting the results, now the researcher must show how those results do or do not answer
the research question and what they mean in its light.

The second objective is to make recommendations for future research. To do so, Chapter Five
should discuss the design and methodological improvements that could strengthen the study (if it
were replicated); what kinds of data might be collected to strengthen the results and their meaning;
and new research questions or problems the results leave unfinished.

These two main objectives can be met by following the section outlines above, which will now be
described in greater detail. Obviously, each researcher will have their own approach, and it is wise
to consult with one’s mentor as to the final design of Chapter Five; but these sections will cover the
main issues involved in the two primary objectives.

Introduction

Like all such chapters in the dissertation, start with an introduction that precedes the first heading
(“Evaluation of Research Questions” in this case) that introduces the chapter. The researcher should
provide the reader with a brief introduction stating the purpose of the chapter, the organization or
main sections of the chapter, and a description of how the chapter fits into the overall dissertation.
This should set the stage for the remainder of the chapter, as well as giving the reader an
understanding of the logical flow of the chapter’s main points and how it relates to the preceding
chapters.
The purpose of this section is to refresh the reader’s understanding of the overall study. It should

1. restate the need for the study

2. explain the study’s significance
3. very briefly indicate the literature reviewed (particularly new findings published while the
dissertation was being completed)

32
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

4. restate the methodology used

5. indicate a very concise recapitulation of the study’s findings
6. state the organization or main sections of the chapter
Do not repeat the relevant sections from earlier chapters. Summarize concisely. Provide enough to
refresh the reader’s understanding of the overall study, including the main points from the theoretical
framework and the review of the previous research, then move on to the core of the Chapter, the
sections to follow. The aim of this section is orientation of the reader to the overall findings to
understand and critique the rest of the chapter.

Evaluation of Research Questions

The key word here is “evaluation.” In Chapter Four, the researcher simply presented the results.
But now begins the researcher’s personal and professional interpretation of what those results
mean. This section relates and interprets the results of the study to their initial research questions,
illuminating the practical and theoretical implications and meanings of the study for the reader.
There really are two interacting questions at play throughout Chapter Five: What does the study (and
any component result) mean? And, why did it turn out like that?

This section interprets the results considering the original research question; that is, an intra-study
interpretation. How well do the results answer the research question? Can they be interpreted
plausibly to provide a stronger answer, and if so, how? And why did the results turn out as they did?

Some dissertations turn out not to or only partially answer the research question. If this is the
case, what does it mean in light of the original question? Are there other implications of the
outcome? What might they be? And finally, what plausible research design or methodological
explanations might account for the outcome?

This search for explanations of the results within the study itself will be complemented by the
following section’s discussion of the relationship of the conclusions with the previous research
and the wider fields of interest. Insofar as this section focuses inwardly, on the study itself, it also
identifies the limitations of the study – its design flaws, problems, or other elements that the
researcher finds had some impact on the results – but a fuller discussion of the limitations and
delimitations can be saved for the “Limitations” section, below.

A suggested outline for the section includes:

A transition paragraph at the start of the section, with a figure comparing Research Questions
with the dominant themes from chapter 4. Thereafter, order the evaluation by research question

Research Question 1 (level 2)

Research Question 2 (level 2)

Research Question 3 (etc.)

Address all dimensions of each research question and explore integrative or common themes
based on the findings in chapter 4.

Fulfillment of Research Purpose

While the previous section, “Discussion of the Results” is an inward focus on interpreting the
nuances of the dissertation study, the “Conclusions Based on the Results” section shifts focus
outward toward the previous literature and the wider field of interest. What do the results mean for
them? For example, if the study’s findings are not consistent with previous research, and if you did
not turn up any intra-study flaws or design weaknesses to account for that, then perhaps the
findings challenge previously-held beliefs. This section is where the researcher teases out these
meanings of the findings.

33
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

A suggested outline for the section includes:

Evaluate and assess to what extent the completed research fulfills its stated purpose (chapter 1).
Make sure this is aligned with chapter 1 and capture the research purpose.
What contribution to knowledge toward resolving or understanding the business technical problem
did this research fulfill?
Specifically, address the significance of the findings in terms of how and why research will benefit
scholarly and practitioner efforts and add to the body of practitioner knowledge. Address how the
findings fit in with the previous literature and the theoretical framework that you presented in
Chapter Two. Is there agreement or disagreement, support or disconfirmation? What does it
mean for the wider field of practice, or for the community of interest related to the general
problem outlined in the “Need for the Study” in Chapter One?

Contribution to Business Technial Problem

Here, you will evaluate, analyze and synthesize how the research contributes knowledge toward
resolving the stated business technical problem based on chapter 4 findings.

Begin with the business technical problem in chapter 1 (1st paragraph).

The second paragraph presents the synthesis of research findings application to the business
technical problem. In describing the practical implications, discuss how your research might benefit
or be used by professionals in your field to address the business technical problem, as well as those
in related disciplines. Avoid the temptation to overstate the implications your research might have. Make sure to
provide citations from the research literature that support your assertions.

Recommendations for Future Research

Researchers can discuss as many as four categories of recommendations for further studies. Each
category reflects back on one of the previous sections of the Chapter. The four most common
categories of recommendations are:

• Recommendations developed directly from the data.

• Recommendations derived from methodological, research design, or other
limitations of the study.
• Recommendations based on delimitations.
• Recommendations to investigate issues not supported by the data but relevant to the
research problem.
Recommendations developed directly from the data.
These are the typical “recommendations for further study,” built directly on the results presented in
Chapter Four and discussed above in “Discussion of the Results” and “Conclusions Based on the
Results.” Most results raise as many questions as they answer, and here is where they are
described. Very commonly, the results can call for the “next level” of investigation. These
recommendations can also include recommendations for treatments or interventions supported by
the data as well.

Recommendations derived from methodological, research design, or other limitations of the

study.
These are recommendations built directly on the limitations of the study. Here the researcher more
fully discusses design problems or limitations. The researcher should identify and discuss any
design element that, with improvement, could significantly enhance the quality of the results without
being unrealistic. (Certainly, any study would have better external validity if it sampled the entire
population, but that is not usually realistic.) Here the emphasis should be not on covering every

34
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

possible improvement or problem, but on reasonable improvements that will result in better future
research and stronger results from similar studies.

Limitations do not include only the flaws and mistakes, although candidly discussing these is
necessary. They also include good-enough elements that could realistically be made better. The
fact that many dissertations are done on a limited budget and with severe time constraints usually
leaves their authors with a wish-list of improvements; here is where those should be candidly and
modestly discussed. No one expects perfection of any study, but the scientific community does
expect researchers to be transparent about how they could improve their work. Here is where
learners provide that transparency. As you discuss limitations of your study, be mindful of being
overly harsh in your critique. You don’t want to leave the reader with the impression that the research
was poorly conceived and
conducted.

Recommendations based on delimitations.

This category of recommendations for further research appears less often in dissertations, although
it is important. Every researcher decides early in the process what important questions, issues,
variables, or other facets of a topic he or she will leave out. The reasons for doing so are usually
pragmatic, involving the availability of resources, time frames, and other practical considerations.
Sometimes, important and interesting aspects of a problem are left out for sound theoretical
reasons. All such omissions are “delimitations,” aspects of the subject that are important and
meaningful, but that were intentionally not investigated for one reason or another.

It is not necessary or wise to try to include any and all such delimitations here. Rather, the researcher
focuses on those offering the greatest chance of broadening or deepening our knowledge of the
phenomenon. Recommendations to investigate issues not supported by the data but relevant to the
research problem.

Conclusion
This section should begin with a concise summary of the dissertation and then move on to overall
conclusions. Note that conclusions are the ideas that you arrive at by considering the summary.
Therefore, in this section, the writer sums up the dissertation, offers a final description (always
concise, sometimes eloquent) of the answers to the research question, and provides closure to the
manuscript as a whole. Here the writer may provide a rhetorical suggestion for how the study could
be used in furthering our understanding of the problem dealt with. Some researchers in the
conclusion exhibit a more lyrical and personal tone, but usually, this is discouraged in favor of
consistency of tone.

As a suggestion (no level 2 headings):

1st paragraph – synopsis of findings and contribution to knowledge.

2nd paragraph – biggest findings from the research.

3rd paragraph – practitioner benefit based on the research.

Researchers should check with their mentors to learn the mentors’ preferences regarding personal
statements of the meaning of the project to the researchers. Some permit this; some discourage it.
If permitted, such statements of personal growth, reflections on lessons learned as a scholar-
researcher, and descriptions of the impact of the dissertation on one’s professional growth can
often provide a satisfying and scholarly final cadence to the dissertation. Again, however, maintain
the scholarly tone and attitude that prevails throughout the dissertation.

35
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

BACK MATTER. APPENDICES

Includes appropriate, required and supplementary supporting information in the appendices, including a
statement of original work, informed consent letter, instrumentation, and other tables and figures.

FRONT MATTER. ABSTRACT

Formulate an abstract which summarizes the research and highlights:

1. Business Technical problem (link directly with chapter 1)
2. Research purpose (link directly with chapter 1)
3. Research questions (link directly with chapter 1)
4. Theoretical framework (theory and gap in knowledge) (link directly with chapter 1)
5. Sources of data (link directly with chapter 3 & 4)
6. Key findings (link directly with chapter 4)
7. Contribution of research to business and business body of knowledge (link directly with chapter 5)

Follow APA 7th edition guidelines and review the Doctoral Publications Guidebook (APA 7th ed.) for
guidance on proper formatting of your dissertation.

• Accurate. Reflects the purpose and content of the dissertation

• Non-evaluative. Report, do not evaluate; do not add or comment on what is in the body of the
dissertation
• Readable. Clear and concise language in active voice
• Concise. Include in the abstract the three to five most important concepts, findings, or
implications
• MUST be 400 words or less
• MUST not have indentation or abbreviation
• MUST align with your study
• Avoid including in-text citations
• MUST be grammatically perfect! This is what most people read first about your study!

36
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

REFERENCES
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Caelli, K., Ray, L., & Mill, J. (2003). 'Clear as mud': Toward greater clarity in generic qualitative
research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(2), 1–24.
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research.
Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cronbach, L.J., & Associates (1980). Toward reform of program evaluation. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Douglass, B. G., & Moustakas, C. (1985). Heuristic inquiry: The internal search to know.
Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 25(3), 39–55.
Fetterman, D. M. (2010). Ethnography: Step-by-step (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Giorgi, A. (1985). Phenomenology and psychological research. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne

University Press.
Giorgi, A. (1997). The theory, practice and evaluation of phenomenological methods as a
qualitative research procedure. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 28, 235- 281.
Giorgi, A.P. & Giorgi, B.M. (2003). The descriptive phenomenological psychological method. In
Camic, P.M., Rhodes, J.E. & Yardley, L. (Eds.), Qualitative research in psychology:
Expanding perspectives in methodology and design (pp. 243-273). Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Giorgi, A. (2009). The descriptive phenomenological method in psychology: A modified Husserlian
approach. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.
Glaser, B.G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory.
Mill, CA: Sociological Press.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.

Leedy, P.D., & Ormrod, J.E. (2016). Practical research: Planning and design (8th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Moustakas, C. (1990). Heuristic research: Design, methodology, and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage

Norris, F. H. (1996). Designing trauma studies: Basic principles. In E.B.Carlson (Ed.),

Trauma research methodology (22-55). Lutherville, MD: Sidran Press.
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Percy, W., Kostere, K. & Kostere, S. (2015). Generic qualitative research in psychology. The Qualitative
Report, 20(2), 76-85 Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR20/2/percy5.pdf

37
QUALITATIVE CHAPTER GUIDES

Robson, C. (1993). Real world research: A resource for scientists and practitioner- researchers.
London: Blackwell.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and theory for developing
grounded theory (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Trochim, W.M.K. (2006). The research methods knowledge base (2nd ed.). Retrieved from
http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb
Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.

38