The purpose of this article is to outline ways in which qualitative research has a contribution to make to research on outcomes in health, social work and education. The main questions are contextualized through a general consideration of the relationship between quantitative and qualitative methods, especially in relation to evaluative research. In the main part of the article, I draw some conclusions regarding the contribution that qualitative methodology can make to outcomes research. I illustrate how qualitative research can contribute indispensably to outcomes research in four ways: design solutions; sensitivity to the micro-processes of practice and programmes; applications of symbolic interactionism and ethnomethodology; and qualitative data analysis.
Abrams, P. (1984) ‘Evaluating Soft Findings: Some Problems of Measuring Informal Care’, Research, Policy and Planning2(2): 1-8.
2.
Becker, H. (1993) ‘Theory: The Necessary Evil’, in D. Flinders and G. Mills (eds) Theory and Concepts in Qualitative Research: Perspectives from the Field. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University Press.
3.
Blair, J. (1995) ‘Informal Logic and Reasoning in Evaluation’, in D.M. Fournier (ed.) Reasoning in Evaluation: Inferential Links and Leaps. New Directions For Evaluation, No 68. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
4.
Bloor, M. (1997) ‘Techniques of Validation in Qualitative Research’, in G. Miller and R. Dingwall (eds) Context and Method in Qualitative Research. London: Sage.
5.
Bryman, A. (1988) Quality and Quantity in Social Research. London: Allen and Unwin.
6.
Campbell, D. (1978) ‘Qualitative Knowing in Action Research’, in M. Brenner and P. Marsh (eds) The Social Context of Methods. London: Croom Helm.
7.
Chelimsky, E. (1997) ‘Thoughts For a New Evaluation Society’, Evaluation3(1): 97-118.
8.
Cronbach, L. (1986) ‘Social Inquiry By and For Earthlings’, in D. Fiske and R. Shweder (eds) Metatheory in Social Science: Pluralisms and Subjectivities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
9.
Cronbach, L., Ambron, S., Dornbusch, S., Hess, R., Hornik, R., Phillips, D., Walker, D. and Weiner, S. (1980) Toward Reform of Program Evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10.
Denzin, N.K. (1989) Interpretative Interactionism. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
11.
Finch, J. (1986) Research and Policy: The Uses of Qualitative Methods in Social and Educational Research. London: Falmer Press.
12.
Fournier, D. and Smith, N. (1993) ‘Clarifying the Merits of Argument in Evaluation Practice’, Evaluation and Program Planning16(4): 315-323.
13.
Giddens, A. (1993) New Rules of Sociological Method. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
14.
Greene, J. (1990) ‘Three Views on the Nature and Role of Knowledge in Social Science’, in E. Guba (ed.) The Paradigm Dialog. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
15.
Greene, J. (1993) ‘The Role of Theory in Qualitative Program Evaluation’, in D. Flinders and G. Mills (eds) Theory and Concepts in Qualitative Research: Perspectives from the Field. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University Press.
16.
Greene, J. and Caracelli, V. (1997) Advances in Mixed Method Evaluation: The Challenge and Benefits of Integrating Diverse Paradigms. New Directions for Evaluation, No. 74. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
17.
Henry, G.T., Julnes, G. and Mark, M.M. (1998) (eds) Realist Evaluation: An Emerging Theory in Support of Practice. New Directions for Evaluation, No. 78. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
18.
House, E. (1980) Evaluating with Validity. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
19.
House, E. (1993) Professional Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
20.
Humphrey, C. and Pease, K. (1992) ‘Effectiveness Measurement in the Probation Service: A View From the Troops’, Howard Journal31(2): 31-52.
21.
Kushner, S. (1996) ‘The Limits of Constructivism’, Evaluation2(2): 189-200.
22.
Lakatos, I. (1970) ‘Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes’, in I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23.
Lofland, J. and Lofland, L. (1995) Analysing Social Settings. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
24.
Long, A. (1994) ‘Assessing Health and Social Outcomes’, in J. Popay and G. Williams (eds) Researching the People’s Health. London: Routledge.
25.
Macdonald, G (1999) ‘Social Work and its Evaluation’, in F. Williams, J. Popay and A. Oakley (eds) Welfare Research: A Critical Review. London: UCL Press.
26.
McKay, D.M. (1988) ‘Value-Free Knowledge: Myth or Norm?’, in D.M. McKay The Open Mind. Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press.
27.
McKeganey, N., MacPherson, I. and Hunter, D. (1988) ‘How “They” Decide: Exploring Professional Decision Making’, Research, Policy and Planning6(1): 15-19.
28.
McLeod, J. (2001) Qualitative Research in Counselling and Psychotherapy. London: Sage.
29.
Miles, M. and Huberman, A. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30.
Miller, G. (1997) ‘Contextualizing Texts: Studying Organisational Texts’, in G. Miller and R. Dingwall (eds) Context and Method in Qualitative Research. London: Sage.
31.
Mohr, W.K. (1997) ‘Interpretive Interactionism: Denzin’s Potential Contribution to Intervention and Outcomes Research’, Qualitative Health Research7(2): 270-286.
32.
National Institutes of Health (2001) Qualitative Methods in Health Research. [http://obssr.od.nih.gov/publications/qualitative.pdf]
33.
Patton, M.Q. (2002) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34.
Phillips, D. (1990) ‘Postpositivistic Science: Myths and Realities’, in E. Guba (ed.) The Paradigm Dialog. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
35.
Reid, W. (1990) ‘Change-Process Research: A New Paradigm?’, in L. Videka-Sherman and W. Reid (eds) Advances in Clinical Social Work Research. Silver Spring, MD: NASW Press.
36.
Reid, W. (1994) ‘Reframing the Epistemological Debate’, in E. Sherman and W. Reid (eds) Qualitative Research in Social Work. New York: Columbia University Press.
37.
Shaw, I. (1999) Qualitative Evaluation. London: Sage.
38.
Shaw, I. and Gould, N. (2001) (eds) Qualitative Social Work Research. London: Sage.
39.
Shaw, I. and Shaw, A. (1997) ‘Game Plans, Buzzes and Sheer Luck: Doing Well in Social Work’, Social Work Research21(2): 69-79.
40.
Shaw, I., Williamson, H. and Parry-Langdon, N. (1992) ‘Developing Models for Day Care Services’, Social Policy and Administration26(1): 73-86.
41.
Silverman, D. (1997) Discourses of Counselling: HIV Counselling as Social Interaction. London: Sage.
42.
Sinclair, I. (2000) ‘Methods and Measurement in Evaluative Social Work’. Theorising Social Work Research seminar. [http://www.nisw.org.uk/tswr/Sinclair]
43.
Stake, R. (1995) The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
44.
Thyer, B. (2000) Review of I. Shaw and J. Lishman (1999) (eds) ‘Evaluation and Social Work Practice’, British Journal of Social Work30(3): 401-402.
45.
Trend, M.G. (1979) ‘On the Reconciliation of Qualitative and Quantitative Analyses’, in T. Cook and C. Reichardt (eds) Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Evaluation Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
46.
Turner, M. and Zimmerman, W. (1994) ‘Acting for the Sake of Research’, in J. Wholey, H. Hatry and K. Newcomer (eds) Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
47.
Wasoff, F. and Dobash, R. (1992) ‘Simulated Clients in “Natural” Settings: Constructing a Client to Study Professional Practice’, Sociology26(2): 333-349.
48.
Wasoff, F. and Dobash, R. (1996) The Simulated Client: A Method for Studying Professionals Working with Clients. Aldershot: Avebury.
49.
Weiss, C. (1988) ‘If Programme Decisions Hinged Only on Information’, Evaluation Practice9(1): 15-28.
50.
Yin, R.K. (1994) Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
