Synthesis through meta-ethnography: paradoxes, enhancements, and possibilities

2003 Qualitative Research 234 citations

Abstract

Despite theoretical differences and methodological questions, the conversation about synthesizing qualitative research raises interest. Meta-ethnography, as initially described by Noblit and Hare (1988), is a foundation for a methodology to synthesize existing case study; however, there are weaknesses that need to be addressed. Using three stages of meta-ethnography, case selection, analysis, and synthesis, the author discusses these weaknesses and provides enhancements so that meta-ethnography becomes a viable option for qualitative researchers. Examples from application in the study of educational leadership illuminate and validate each enhancement. The author concludes by discussing how, when enhancements are made, meta-ethnography also becomes a methodology with compelling implications for making the research process a more democratic one.

Keywords

EthnographyConversationSociologyEpistemologyFoundation (evidence)Strengths and weaknessesQualitative researchProcess (computing)Engineering ethicsManagement scienceComputer scienceSocial sciencePolitical scienceEngineeringAnthropologyPhilosophyLaw

Affiliated Institutions

Related Publications

Publication Info

Year
2003
Type
article
Volume
3
Issue
3
Pages
321-344
Citations
234
Access
Closed

Social Impact

Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions

Citation Metrics

234
OpenAlex
24
Influential
184
CrossRef

Cite This

Lynn H. Doyle (2003). Synthesis through meta-ethnography: paradoxes, enhancements, and possibilities. Qualitative Research , 3 (3) , 321-344. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794103033003

Identifiers

DOI
10.1177/1468794103033003

Data Quality

Data completeness: 77%