This article urges qualitative researchers to understand the work they do as inspired by practical concerns rather than by its ontological and/or cognitive status as science. It is time to let go and move on from the inherited vocabulary of scientific rigor. Excessive focus on rigor impedes and distracts from talking about other, more important, problems such as the ethical commitments, moral importance, and artfulness of qualitative inquiry. Calls for greater scientific rigor mistake the abstract for the concrete and may mask the covert intention to delegitimate experiential, performative, autoethnographic, and evocative approaches to inquiry that understand qualitative inquiry as a moral, ethical, and political venture. The rule of rigor, if there is to be one, should be pragmatic and literary not scientific, and qualitative researchers and should feel obliged to turn life inside out and upside down, investigating what it means to be alive and to produce just societies.
AtkinsonP. (1997). Narrative turn or blind alley?Qualitative Health Research, 7, 325-344.
2.
AtkinsonP.DelamontS. (2006). In the roiling smoke: Qualitative inquiry and contested fields. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19, 747-755.
3.
BarleyS. R. (1989). Careers, identities, and institutions: The legacy of the Chicago school of sociology. In ArthurM.LawrenceB. (Eds.) Handbook of career theory (pp. 41-65). New York: Cambridge University Press.
4.
BatesonG. (1979a). Last lecture. In BatesonG.DonaldsonR. E. (Eds.), A sacred unity: Further steps to an ecology of mind (p. 313). New York, NY: HarperCollins.
5.
BatesonG. (1979b). Mind and nature: A necessary unity. New York, NY: Dutton.
6.
BochnerA. (1985). Perspectives on inquiry: Representation, conversation, and reflection. In KnappM.MillerG. R. (Eds.), The handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 27-58). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
7.
BochnerA. (2000). Criteria against ourselves. Qualitative Inquiry, 6, 266-272.
8.
BochnerA. (2002). Perspectives on inquiry III: The moral of stories. In KnappM.DaleyJ. (Eds.), The handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 73-101). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
9.
BochnerA. (2010). “Resisting the mystification of narrative inquiry”: Unmasking the real conflict between story analysts and storytellers. Sociology of Health & Illness, 32, 662-665.
BochnerA. (2013). “Putting meanings into motion”: Autoethnography’s existential calling. In JonesS. H.AdamsT.EllisC. (Eds.), Handbook of autoethnography (pp. 50-56). Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
12.
BochnerA. (2014). Coming to narrative: A personal history of paradigm change in the human sciences. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
13.
BochnerA. (2017). Heart of the matter: A mini-manifesto for autoethnography. International Review of Qualitative Research, 10, 67-80.
14.
BochnerA.EllisC. (2016). Evocative autoethnography: Writing lives, telling stories. New York, NY: Routledge.
15.
BrunerJ. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
16.
CliffordJ.MarcusG. (1986). Writing culture: The poetics and politics of ethnography. Berkeley: University of California Press.
17.
DenzinN. (2010). The qualitative manifesto: A call to arms. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
FoucaultM. (1970). The archeology of knowledge & the discourse on language (Sheridan SmithA. M.,Trans.). New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
23.
FreemanM. (2016). Psychology as the science of human Being. In ValsinerJ.MarsicoG.ChaudharyN.SatoT.DazzaniV. (Eds.), The Yokohama Manifesto (pp. 349-364). New York, NY: Springer.
24.
GadamerH.-G. (1975). Truth and method. New York, NY: Seabury.
25.
GeertzC. (1980). Blurred genres: The refiguration of social thought. The American Scholar, 49, 165-179.
26.
GerardJ.RudolphS.SriprakashA. (2017). The politics of post-qualitative inquiry: History and power. Qualitative Inquiry, 23, 384-394.
27.
GergenM. M.GergenK. J. (2000). Qualitative inquiry: Tensions and transformations. In DenzinN.LincolnY. (Eds.), The sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 1025-1046). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
28.
GreeneJ. C. (2013). On rhizomes, lines of flight, mangles, and other assemblages. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26, 749-758.
29.
GubaE. G.LincolnY. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
30.
HammersleyM. (1995). The politics of social research. London, England: SAGE.
HollisM. (1990). The poetics of personhood. In MalachowskiA. L. (Ed.), Reading Rorty: Critical responses to philosophy and the mirror of nature and beyond (pp. 244-256). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
33.
HusserlE. (2002). The shorter logical investigations. New York, NY: Routledge.
34.
JovanovićG. (2011). Toward a social history of qualitative research. History of the Human Sciences, 24, 1-27.
35.
KincheloeJ. L. (2001). Describing the bricolage: Conceptualizing a new rigor in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 7, 679-692.
36.
KreftingL. (1991). Rigor in qualitative research: The assessment of trustworthiness. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 45, 214-222.
37.
KuhnT. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
38.
LatherP. (2013). Methodology-21: What do we do in the afterward?International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26, 634-645.
39.
LatherP.St. PierreE. A. (2013). Introduction: Post-qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26, 629-633.
40.
LatourB. (2014). On selves, forms, and forces. Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 4, 261-266.
41.
LyotardJ.-F. (1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge (BenningtonG.MassumiB., Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
42.
MacIntyreA. (1981). After virtue. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
43.
MalinowskiB. (1926). Crime and custom in savage society. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
44.
MalinowskiB. (2002). Argonauts of the Western Pacific: An account of native enterprise and adventure in the archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea. New York, NY: Routledge.
45.
MarcusG. E.FischerM. M. (1986). A crisis of representation in the human sciences. In Anthropology as cultural critique: An experimental moment in the human sciences (pp. 7-16). Chicago, IL.: University of Chicago Press.
46.
MorseJ. M. (2015). Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 25, 1212-1222.
47.
RortyR. (1979). Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
48.
RortyR. (1982). Method, social science, and social hope. In RortyR. (Ed.), Consequences of pragmatism (Essays 1972-1980) (pp. 191-210). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
49.
RortyR. (1989). Contingency, irony, and solidarity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
50.
RortyR. (1991). Science as solidarity. In RortyR. (Ed.), Objectivity, relativism, and truth (pp. 35-45). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
51.
RortyR. (1999). Philosophy and social hope. London, England: Penguin Books.
52.
RubinA. (2000). Standards for rigor in qualitative inquiry. Research on Social Work Practice, 10, 173-178.
SandelowskiM. (1986). The problem of rigor in qualitative research. Advances in Nursing Science, 8, 27-37.
55.
ShieldsD. (2013). How literature saved my life. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
56.
SingerM. (2013). On convention. In SingerM.WalkerN. (Eds.), Bending genre: Essays on creative nonfiction (pp. 141-149). New York, NY: Bloomsbury.
57.
St. PierreE. (1997). Methodology in the fold and the irruption of transgressive data. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 10, 175-189.
58.
St. PierreE. A. (2011). Post qualitative research: The critique and the coming after. In DenzinN.LincolnY. (Eds.). The Sage handbook of qualitative methods (4th ed., pp. 611-625). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
59.
St. PierreE. (2013). The posts continue: Becoming. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26, 646-657.
60.
St. PierreE. (2016). The long reach of logical positivism/logical empiricism. In DenzinN.GiardinaM. (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry through a critical lens (pp. 19-29). New York, NY: Routledge.
61.
St. PierreE.PillowW. (2000). Introduction: Inquiry among the ruins. In PierreE.PillowW. (Eds.), Working the ruins: Feminist poststructural theory and methods in education (pp. 1-24). London, England: Routledge.
62.
WhiteheadA. N. (2010). Process and reality. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
