vignettes/form_OSFqual1_v1.Rmd
form_OSFqual1_v1.RmdThis vignette shows the Qualitative Preregistration Template form (added to preregr by Aleksandra Lazić). It can be initialized as follows:
initialized_OSFqual1_v1 <-
preregr::prereg_initialize(
"OSFqual1_v1"
);After this, content can be specified with preregr::prereg_specify() or preregr::prereg_justify. To check the next field(s) for which content still has to be specified, use preregr::prereg_next_item().
The form’s metadata is:
| field | content |
|---|---|
| title | Qualitative Preregistration Template |
| author | Tamarinde L. Haven, Timothy M. Errington, Kristian Skrede Gleditsch, Leonie van Grootel, Alan M. Jacobs, Florian G. Kern, Rafael Piñeiro, Fernando Rosenblatt, Lidwine B. Mokkink |
| date | 2020-11-09 |
| comments | NA |
| source | Haven, T. L., Errington, T. M., Gleditsch, K. S., van Grootel, L., Jacobs, A. M., Kern, F. G., Piñeiro, R., Rosenblatt, F., & Mokkink, L. B. (2020). Preregistering Qualitative Research: A Delphi Study. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920976417 |
| version | 1.0 |
The form is defined as follows (use preregr::form_show() to show the form in the console, instead):
preregr::form_knit(
"OSFqual1_v1"
);The Qualitative Preregistration Template was created by researchers from the qualitative community for registration of primarily qualitative work. It is available as a registration option on the Open Science Framework (OSF).
You may cite this template as: Haven, T. L., Errington, T. M., Gleditsch, K. S., van Grootel, L., Jacobs, A. M., Kern, F. G., Piñeiro, R., Rosenblatt, F., & Mokkink, L. B. (2020). Preregistering qualitative research: A Delphi study. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920976417
Download the template at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fYQgzQsqlokFecOthoH8zFTnbKjuOJWgvmERquZUDsE/edit?usp=sharing and fill it out.
Preregister your study by either:
Attaching the document to an OSF project and registering with the “Open-Ended Registration” or “OSF-Standard Pre-Data Collection Registration” form or
Using the “Qualitative Preregistration” form available in Registration view of your OSF project.
For more information about preregistration in qualitative research, and this template in particular, we recommend watching the following webinar: https://osf.io/98xue/
Detailed instructions on submitting a preregistration to OSF can be found at: https://help.osf.io/article/158-create-a-preregistrationOther templates are available at: https://osf.io/zab38/
Provide the working title of your study. It may be the same title that you submit for publication of your final manuscript, but it is not a requirement.
Example: Effect of sugar on brownie tastiness.
More info: The title should be a specific and informative description of a project. Vague titles such as ‘Fruit fly preregistration plan’ are not appropriate.Give a brief description of the current study.
More info: This information will be searchable in the Registry view (if public) so make sure it is concise and contains the more pertinent information.Select the license you wish to apply to this registration.
More info: for help choosing a license, please see: https://help.osf.io/article/148-licensingPlease specify the overall purposes, objectives or aims of the research.
If relevant, please reflect on whether your aim is different across different domains (e.g. knowledge generation, policy development, community resourcing). If so, specify your aim for each domain that is relevant for your study.
If helpful, please select the type of aim (non-exhaustive list):
Exploring
Describing
Theory evaluating
Comparing
Please specify your research question or questions as they are guiding your research now. If relevant, you may also specify here any hypotheses to be assessed. The research questions may break down your aim into smaller, distinct inquiries.
If relevant, you may distinguish between primary and secondary research questions or hypotheses.
Example: If it is your aim to explore the attitudes of caregivers towards Alzheimer patients in a local ward, your research questions could specify precisely what you plan to study; for instance, how ward staff tries to treat the patients with dignity or how the relationship between the patient and their family members or loved ones evolved since that patient was admitted to the ward.Please provide a brief, overarching characterisation of the study design.
Your response might consist of a succinct label (e.g. “case study” or “ethnography”) and/or a brief elaboration of that label’s meaning.
A study may involve a combination of different designs, including a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods.Please describe your sampling or recruitment strategy (examples include, but are not limited to: purposive, snowball, theoretical, and maximum variation sampling) and/or your case selection strategy (examples include, but are not limited to: typical case, most similar case, most different case, diverse case, and deviant case).
Please provide a short rationale for why you selected this type of strategy.Please describe your method of data collection or data generation. Examples of methods include (but are not restricted to) interviews, focus groups, enabling techniques, self-reports, field notes, diaries, (participative) observation, archival research, or mixed methods.
Please provide a brief rationale for why you plan to use this particular data collection/generation method in your study.Please describe the criteria or rationale behind when you will stop data generation or collection. Possible criteria include (but are not restricted to): data saturation*, when inclusion criteria are satisfied, resource constraints (e.g. time/funding), or when the analysis has produced an enriching answer to the research question(s).
Example: We follow Fusch & Ness (2005) and interpret saturation to be reached when there is enough information to replicate the study, the ability to obtain new information has been attained, and further coding is no longer feasible.Please specify the type and details of your data analysis approach. Examples of approaches include (but are not limited to): narrative analysis, phenomenological analysis, thematic analysis, content analysis, psychoanalytic analysis, grounded theory, process tracing, comparative analysis, or discourse analysis.
If multiple interpretations of your approach exist, please specify the version you will be using.
Please provide a rationale for why your selected data analytic approach is appropriate given your study’s aim(s).
Example: If you indicated ‘phenomenological analysis’, you may want to specify the theorist whose approach you are following, e.g. “We use a phenomenological approach as explained by Colaizzi (1978)”; or if you indicated ‘content analysis’, a specification could be: “We apply inductive content analysis as described in Elo & Kyngäs (2008)”.Please describe what your process of data analysis will look like. Questions to keep in mind could be (but are not limited to):
Who will be involved in the data analysis, and in what role?
If relevant, indicate any procedures that will be used to turn “raw” data into analyzable form (e.g. a coding scheme)
If relevant, indicate any evidentiary criteria that will be used to assess any hypotheses (e.g. what evidence will count as consistent or inconsistent with a given proposition)
Please specify the strategies, actions or measures you will employ to assure methodological integrity. Examples include (but are not limited to):
Member checking
Triangulation with other data sources
Bringing in different perspectives
Have different researchers analyse the data
Consensus building among team members or ‘interrater reliability’
Negative case analysis
Peer debriefing
Cross-checks for rivalling explanations
Bring in an ‘auditor’
Reflexivity
Verisimilitude
Emotionality
Personal Responsibility
An ethic of caring
Political praxis
Multivoiced texts
Dialogues with subjects
Other (please explain)
Feel free to reflect on your relation to or association with the studied phenomenon and your position in the research setting/field, including your academic/personal standpoints, assumptions and values.
In addition, if there is a potential conflict of interest [whether you have a previous relationship with the studied phenomenon, and if you consider that there are previous positions or assumptions that may influence the present study] that can arise, you may want to report that here.
Example: If you study the lives of detained immigrants, you might want to talk about your political viewpoints, experience working with detained immigrants, relevant policy work, or perhaps your own experience as a detained immigrant.