Three principles for writing an effective qualitative results section
Keywords:academic writing, results section, qualitative research
AbstractWriting an effective qualitative results section can be a daunting task. How do you report the findings of the study and tell a compelling story? It is this delicate balance that we strive to navigate in this paper. We offer three principles—storytelling, authenticity and argument—to help writers envision the story they will tell, select the data as evidence for that story and integrate quotations to guide the reader’s interpretation. Practical advice and concrete illustrations make the principles easy to apply to your own writing. Finally, by reflecting on how historical, methodological and disciplinary elements shape their application, you will be able to use these principles to enhance the persuasiveness of your qualitative results section.
Apramian, T., Cristancho, S., Watling, C., Ott, M., & Lingard, L. (2015). Thresholds of principle and preference: Exploring procedural variation in postgraduate surgical education. Academic Medicine, 90, S70–S76. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000909
Bynum, W. E., Varpio, L., Lagoo, J., & Teunissen, P. W. (2021). "I’m unworthy of being in this space": The origins of shame in medical students. Medical Education, 55(2), 185–197. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14354
Corden, A., & Sainsbury, R. (2006). Using verbatim quotations in reporting qualitative social research: Researchers’ views. University of York. http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/spru/pubs/pdf/verbquotresearch.pdf
Emmerton-Coughlin, H., Schlachta, C., & Lingard, L. (2017). "The other right": Control strategies and the role of language use in laparoscopic training. Medical Education, 51(12), 1269–1276. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13420
Ginsburg, S., Regehr, G., Lingard, L., & Eva, K. W. (2015). Reading between the lines: Faculty interpretations of narrative evaluation comments. Medical Education, 49(3), 296–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12637
Graff, G., & Birkenstein, C. (2018). “They say/I say”: The moves that matter in academic writing (4th ed.). W. W. Norton & Company.
Greenhalgh, T., Seyan, K., & Boynton, P. (2004). “Not a university type”: Focus group study of social class, ethnic, and sex differences in school pupils’ perceptions about medical school. BMJ, 328(7455), 1541. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.328.7455.1541
Lingard, L. (2004). Communication failures in the operating room: An observational classification of recurrent types and effects. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 13(5), 330–334. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2003.008425
Lingard, L. (2019). Beyond the default colon: Effective use of quotes in qualitative research. Perspectives on Medical Education, 8, 360–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-019-00550-7
Lingard, L., & Watling, C. (2016). It’s a story, not a study: Writing an effective research paper. Academic Medicine, 91(12), e12. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000001389
McElhinney, Z., & Kennedy, C. (2021). By accident or design? An exploration of the career pathways, experiences and identities of academic GPs using composite narratives. Education for Primary Care, 32(5), 266–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/14739879.2021.1894991
Morrow, S. L. (2005). Quality and trustworthiness in qualitative research in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 250–260. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0188.8.131.52
Pack, R., Lingard, L., Watling, C., & Cristancho, S. (2020). Beyond summative decision making: Illuminating the broader roles of competence committees. Medical Education, 54(6), 517–527. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14072
Pratt, M. G. (2008). Fitting oval pegs into round holes: Tensions in evaluating and publishing qualitative research in top-tier North American journals. Organizational Research Methods, 11(3), 481–509. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428107303349
Pratt, M. G. (2009). From the editors: For the lack of a boilerplate: Tips on writing up (and reviewing) qualitative research. Academy of Management Journal, 52(5), 856–862. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.44632557
Should scientists tell stories? (2013). Nature Methods, 10(11), 1037–1037. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2726
Simmons, A. (2019). The story factor: Inspiration, influence, and persuasion through the art of storytelling (Revised ed.). Basic Books.
Tottie, G. (2016). Planning what to say: Uh and um among the pragmatic markers. In G. Kaltenböck, E. Keizer, & A. Lohmann (Eds.), Studies in language companion series (Vol. 178, pp. 97–122). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.178.04tot
Varpio, L., Ajjawi, R., Monrouxe, L. V., O’Brien, B. C., & Rees, C. E. (2017). Shedding the cobra effect: Problematising thematic emergence, triangulation, saturation and member checking. Medical Education, 51(1), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13124
Watling, C., Driessen, E., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., & Lingard, L. (2012). Learning from clinical work: The roles of learning cues and credibility judgements. Medical Education, 46(2), 192–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04126.x
Willis, R. (2019). The use of composite narratives to present interview findings. Qualitative Research, 19(4), 471–480. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794118787711
How to Cite
On acceptance for publication in FoHPE the copyright of the manuscript is signed over to ANZAHPE, the publisher of FoHPE.
Any reproduction of material published in FoHPE must have the express permission of the publisher.
Articles published in Focus on Health Professional Education (FoHPE) are available under Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives Licence (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).