IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v34y1992i10p1097-1103.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantitative and qualitative approaches to the evaluation of the medical dialogue

Author

Listed:
  • Roter, Debra
  • Frankel, Richard

Abstract

Increasing availability of audio and videotape of medical encounters has drawn the attention of researchers from diverse disciplines and perspectives. Unfortunately, the result has more frequently been interdisciplinary competition than collaboration. Most striking are the differences in approach between researchers applying qualitative and quantitative methods. Advocates of each of these methods have not only argued their own relative merits, but have maintained unusually critical and intellectually isolated positions. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that the paradigmatic perspective which promotes mutual exclusivity is in error. We present several examples of research findings which demonstrate the rich potential for cross-method research. Examples have been taken from the areas of most fruitful qualitative and quantitative research--information gathering, patient disclosure, and information-giving.

Suggested Citation

  • Roter, Debra & Frankel, Richard, 1992. "Quantitative and qualitative approaches to the evaluation of the medical dialogue," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1097-1103, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:34:y:1992:i:10:p:1097-1103
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(92)90283-V
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Collins, Sarah & Drew, Paul & Watt, Ian & Entwistle, Vikki, 2005. "'Unilateral' and 'bilateral' practitioner approaches in decision-making about treatment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(12), pages 2611-2627, December.
    2. Sechrest, Lee & Sidani, Souraya, 1995. "Quantitative and qualitative methods: : Is There an Alternative?," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 77-87.
    3. Epstein, Ronald M. & Franks, Peter & Fiscella, Kevin & Shields, Cleveland G. & Meldrum, Sean C. & Kravitz, Richard L. & Duberstein, Paul R., 2005. "Measuring patient-centered communication in Patient-Physician consultations: Theoretical and practical issues," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(7), pages 1516-1528, October.
    4. Radley, Alan & Mayberry, John & Pearce, Melanie, 2008. "Time, space and opportunity in the outpatient consultation: 'The doctor's story'," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(7), pages 1484-1496, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:34:y:1992:i:10:p:1097-1103. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.