I wish I could answer your question, but as you point out the the field is so "enormously wide" that I can't imagine any one article where the methods would match the interests of a large enough group of readers.

As for whether these methods are used, I personally use the Web of Science, Social Science Citation Index to track the number of articles that mention using focus groups, and there were over 4000 last year. So, I don't see any reason to worry about whether or not people are putting qualitative methods to use. Whether or not they are using them well is another matter, however.

Mic - David makes a good point on the breadth of the field. When teaching qualitative research (and supervising HDR students) qualitative approaches - I will generally refer (for clinical disciplines) to the three main 'comtemporary' approaches. In a rank order - they tend to be phenomenology, grounded theory and ethnography. For each of these, there are many different methodological/design variations. For instance, the multiple different phenomenological schools. All do different things in different ways. On the other hand, a fast-emerging and very popular 'new' approach is qualitative descriptive exploratory approaches. The attached chapter on common qualitative approches may assist further.

Thank you – David – for your answer and your suggestion concerning Web of Science. Indeed there will be no single article or monograph that will match the interest of an overwhelmingly large group of readers. But that is not what I tried to ask. I may not have expressed myself very well.

I am decidedly not interested in pieces of work, which represent the field in total or which are of general interest for everybody. Of course there is (almost) none. I am interested in your personal judgment.

"Which piece(s) of work, make(s) a positive difference for you?"

In my eyes that would be the reason, to recommend a book/article: I recommend it, because I am excited. To put my question differently again: "Which piece of work in qualitative research excites you?"

When I talk about "making a positive difference", I am suggesting that there are books and articles that matter for one personally. That is at least my experience.

Thank you Dean for this promising overview chapter. I already wrote an answer to David to state my question more precisely. I am concerned with the personal judgment of fellow scholars of qualitative research and my question is: "Which piece(s) of work excite(s) you?" (in a positiv way of course)

I don't know if this additional question helps but I will reformulate my initial question.

Dear Michael Ernst-Heidenreich,

Qualitative Research – Which research studies would you suggest fellow researchers? This is a very general question and a very general answer which reads as it depends can be given to it. It depends on the research problem that the researcher intends to deal with or to address and the purpose of the research as to which research studies would be suggested to fellow researchers.

Best Regards

Desalegn Abraha

Dear Desalegn Abraha Gebrekidan

Thank you for your reply. I would not dare to disagree – the questions of intentions and purpose are crucial. But I wonder if there can't be a discussion about great 'crafts(wo)menship'.

At the same time I have to admit, if three lifelong scholars having troubles with my question, I should rethink it?

Best regards

Michael Ernst-Heidenreich

Echoing Desalegn's answer, above, I suggest that researchers maintain broad awareness of the variety of qualitative (and quantitative) research methods in order to implement the method(s) best suited to their research---rather than try to implement a 'pet' method which is really unsuitable.

In other words, do not go into a study as, for instance, one of 'we grounded theorists' where this is not warranted by your research question or problem.

Dear Dr Michael Ernst-Heidenreich,

Thank for your feedback.

Best Regards

Desalegn Abraha

One particular work has made a big difference for me and my colleagues. Evan Lieberman's (2005) "Nested Analysis" is a research design strategy for integrating qualitative and quantitative methods. Highly recommend:

Article Nested Analysis as a Mixed-Method Strategy for Cross-National Research

Thank you very much for your suggestion, Philip Adams, and I could not agree more. But my own intention with this debate is exactely to foster this – to use your words –  "broad awareness of the variety" of research by sharing and discussing great pieces of work. It is all about curiosity and awareness. I agree absolutely that adopting a 'pet' method is utterly useless. Best Regards.

Thank you Timothy Fraser for your reply – I is actually of imminent us for me ;-). But another question. What about Lieberman 2003 or 2001a/b: can you recommend those as well done exemplars for that approach? Thank you again...

@Michael Ernst-Heidenreich, I mentioned Lieberman's work because it helps you select case studies in a good way for causal inference. Lieberman advocates that we start out with a large-N analysis for initial theory testing, and then use case studies in an interesting cycle for theory building. You choose one on-the-line case that demonstrates the trend from your large-N analysis, and one off-the-line case that deviates from that trend. Using fieldwork, interviews, or some other qualitative method, you investigate these two cases to confirm (or remedy) any problems in your theory, and then revamp the large-N analysis accordingly. Excellent strategy for robust causal inference.

Thank you Farkhanda Ijaz

I think that there is a great responsibility for writing up our research. Furthermore, even if I totally agree that it (almost) doesn't matter which methods are used, there is written up research out there, that is impressive, insightful and helpful for its readers. And I am still looking for books, essay and articles fitting that category: not in my eyes, but in yours.

I would like to thank all of you for making very insightfull and interesting contributions to the question; Qualitative Research – Which research studies would you suggest fellow researchers to read?

Best Regards

Desalegn Abraha

Right now I am reading:

Bogner, Artur & Rosenthal, Gabrielle (Eds.) (2018): KindersoldatInnen im Kontext. Biographien, familien- und kollektivgeschichtliche Verläufe in Norduganda. Göttingen: Göttinger Universitätsverlag

It is a piece of work about "Child Soldiers", that have fled the "Lord Resistance Army" and have been pardoned – about their families and communities and all kinds of problems accompanying intense violence. Even if the issue is not joyful in itself, I am still enjoying (as a fellow researcher) how Bogner and Rosenthal are showing how insightful (inter alia) narrative interviewing and sequential analysis can be.

And I am looking forward to discuss this small book with students.