article Closed Access EN 2005-04-01

Consensual qualitative research: An update.

Clara E. Hill, Sarah Knox, B. J. Thompson, Elizabeth Nutt Williams, Shirley A. Hess, Nicholas Ladany

Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol. 52, Issue 2, pp. 196–205 (2005)

University of Maryland, College Park, Marquette University, Towson University, St. Mary's College of Maryland, Shippensburg University, Lehigh University

DOI: 10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.196

Publisher Website Google Scholar

Abstract

The authors reviewed the application of consensual qualitative research (CQR) in 27 studies published since the method’s introduction to the field in 1997 by C. E. Hill, B. J. Thompson, and E. N. Williams (1997). After first describing the core components and the philosophical underpinnings of CQR, the authors examined how it has been applied in terms of the consensus process, biases, research teams, data collection, data analysis, and writing up the results and discussion sections of articles. On the basis of problems that have arisen in each of these areas, the authors made recommendations for modifications of the method. The authors concluded that CQR is a viable qualitative method and suggest several ideas for research on the method itself. In the early 1990s, when we wanted to conduct qualitative research, we explored several different approaches. Although the existing qualitative approaches had a number of valuable features, we were frustrated because the descriptions seemed vague, diffi-cult to comprehend, and equally difficult to implement. Hence, based on our experiences, we (Hill, Thompson, & Williams, 1997) developed consensual qualitative research (CQR), which we hoped