Using naturalistic inquiry to inform qualitative description
evidence and practice    

Using naturalistic inquiry to inform qualitative description

Natalie Ann Cutler PhD candidate, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia
Elizabeth Halcomb Professor of primary health care nursing, School of Nursing, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia
Jenny Sim Senior lecturer, School of Nursing, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia

Background Choosing how to answer a research question requires an understanding of philosophical and theoretical assumptions and how these inform a study’s methodology and methods. This can be a challenge for all researchers, but for novice researchers, such as doctoral candidates, this can feel like an overwhelming task. Ensuring there is clear alignment between philosophy, theory, methodology and methods is an essential part of the research process, that enables research to be undertaken with clarity and integrity. This alignment must be a good fit for the research aim, and to ensure the researcher’s intrinsic values and beliefs do not affect the analysis undertaken.

Aim To describe the alignment between qualitative description and naturalistic inquiry and how it was applied to a doctoral candidate’s exploration of the meaning of safety for people with experience of admission to an acute mental health unit.

Discussion Understanding the alignment between qualitative descriptive methodology and naturalistic inquiry provided a clear pathway for the doctoral candidate.

Conclusion The assumptions that underpin a methodological approach need to be unpacked to understand how to answer a research question effectively.

Implications for practice Qualitative description, informed by naturalistic inquiry, offers a practical way to explore and answer research questions.

Nurse Researcher. 29, 3, 29-33. doi: 10.7748/nr.2021.e1788

Correspondence

nac639@uowmail.edu.au

Peer review

This article has been subject to external double-blind peer review and has been checked for plagiarism using automated software

Conflict of interest

None declared

Permission

To reuse this article or for information about reprints and permissions, please contact permissions@rcni.com

Write for us

For information about writing for RCNi journals, contact writeforus@rcni.com

For author guidelines, go to rcni.com/write-for-nurse-researcher

Want to read more?

Already subscribed? Log in

OR

Unlock full access to RCNi Plus today

Save over 50% on your first 3 months

Your subscription package includes:
  • Unlimited online access to all 10 RCNi Journals and their archives
  • Customisable dashboard featuring 200+ topics
  • RCNi Learning featuring 180+ RCN accredited learning modules
  • RCNi Portfolio to build evidence for revalidation
  • Personalised newsletters tailored to your interests
Subscribe
RCN student member? Try Nursing Standard Student

Alternatively, you can purchase access to this article for the next seven days. Buy now

Or