H is for Human and How (Not) To Evaluate Qualitative Research in HCI

Crabtree, Andy

Abstract

Concern has recently been expressed by HCI researchers as to the inappropriate treatment of qualitative studies through a positivistic mode of evaluation that places emphasis on measurement and metrics. This contrasts with the nature of qualitative research, which privileges interpretation and understanding over quantification. This paper explains the difference between positivism and interpretivism, the limits of quantification in human science, the distinctive contribution of qualitative research, and how quality assurance might be provided for in the absence of numbers via five basic criteria that reviewers may use to evaluate qualitative studies on their own terms.

Citation

Crabtree, A. (2025). H is for Human and How (Not) To Evaluate Qualitative Research in HCI. Human-Computer Interaction, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2025.2475743

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Acceptance Date: Feb 28, 2025
• Online Publication Date: Mar 18, 2025
• Publication Date: Mar 18, 2025
• Deposit Date: Mar 5, 2025
• Publicly Available Date: Mar 19, 2026
• Journal: Human-Computer Interaction
• Print ISSN: 0737-0024
• Electronic ISSN: 1532-7051
• Publisher: Taylor and Francis
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Pages: 1-24
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2025.2475743
• Keywords: HCI; human science; qualitative research; evaluation criteria
• Public URL: https://nottingham-repository.worktribe.com/output/46190107
• Publisher URL: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07370024.2025.2475743#abstract