Skip to main content

What Now and How? Publishing the Qualitative Journal Article

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Qualitative Research in Criminology

Abstract

Publishing a qualitative journal article often takes a certain tenacity for a variety of reasons, which are addressed in this chapter. First, extant research shows that top-tiered journals are less likely to accept articles that employ qualitative methods, though interview data are accepted at a higher rate compared to other approaches. Second, as qualitative researchers, we may become a bit “sloppy” or complacent in the presentation of our methods and fail to provide sufficient details about the data analysis. Third, case studies, ethnographies, interviews, archival, sensory, social media, the Internet, and photography, for example, are part and parcel of our current lexicon of research. Under these circumstances, progress demands a certain amount of recognition that may mean using and understanding a different lens of exploration and review. Additionally, we argue that the time has arrived to reject the dichotomy between qualitative and quantitative research. New and standard approaches to research mean accepting and integrating unique and mixed methods that provide richer data. Finally, hoping to support qualitative researchers in the publication process, this chapter examines many of the “dos and don’ts” that should be considered when submitting a qualitative article for peer review.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The misconceptions that play out in the dichotomy of quantitative versus qualitative have outlived their usefulness. Like many debates in criminology, extremist viewpoints are tempered by the rejection of a dichotomy between the approaches (Buckler, 2008; Kraska, 2008, Tewksbury et al., 2005). The advantages and disadvantages of qualitative research have received a great deal of attention in the literature in many academic fields (see e.g., Berg, 2007; Buckler, 2008; Hussein et al., 2014; Jacques, 2014; Starman, 2013; Tweskbury, 2013).

  2. 2.

    See Sun and Benson Chap. 3 in Part I.

References

  • Adler, F. (1975). Sisters in crime: The rise of the new female criminal. McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1999). The joys of research. Sociological Origins, 1(2), 3–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, E. K. (2020). Political ideology and research: How neoliberalism can explain the paucity of qualitativecriminological research. Alternative, 45(1), 20–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banal, P., & Corley, K. (2011). From the editors: The coming of age for qualitative research: Embracing the diversity of qualitative methods. Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 233–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, H. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the sociology of deviance. Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, B. (2007). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (6th ed.). Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourke, B. (2014). Positionality: Reflecting on the research process. The qualitative report, 19(33), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckler, K. (2008). The quantitative/qualitative divide revisited: A study of published research, doctoral program curricula, and journal editor perceptions. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 19(3), 383–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambliss, W. J. (1973). The saints and the roughnecks. Society, 11(1), 24–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chenail, R. (2009). Communicating your qualitative research better. Family Business Review, 22, 105–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A. M., & Thompson, D. R. (2016). Five tips for writing qualitative research in high-impact journals: Moving from #BMJnoQual. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406916641250

  • Collins, H. (2003). Discrimination, equality and social inclusion. The modern law review, 66(1), 16–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copes, H. (2016). A narrative approach to studying symbolic boundaries among drug users: A qualitative meta-synthesis. Crime, Media, Culture: An International Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741659016641720

  • Copes, H., Beaton, B., Ayeni, D., Dabney, D., & Tewksbury, R. (2020). A content analysis of qualitative research published in top criminology and criminal justice journals from 2010 to 2019. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 45, 1060–1079. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09540-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, F. T. (2002). It’s a wonderful life: Reflections on a career in progress. In G. Geis & M. Dodge (Eds.), Lessons of criminology (pp. 1–22). Anderson Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodge, M., Starr-Gimeno, D., & Williams, T. (2005). Putting on the sting: Women police officers’ perspectives on reverse prostitution assignments. International Journal of Police Science and Management, 7(2), 71–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrell, J., & Hamm, M. S. (1998). Ethnographies at the edge: Crime, deviance, and field research. Northeastern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geis, G. (1977). Heavy electrical equipment antitrust cases of 1961. In M. B. Clinard & R. Quinney (Eds.), Criminal behavior systems: A typology (pp. 139–151). Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hussein, M. E., Hirst, S., Salyers, V., & Osuji, J. (2014). Using grounded theory as a method of inquire: Advantages and disadvantages. The Qualitative Report, 19, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kipling, R. (1892). Barrack-room ballads and verses. Methuen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraska, P. B. (2008). The third way: Teaching mixed methods research. ACJS Today, 23(1), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levi, M. (2015). Qualitative research on elite frauds, ordinary frauds, and “organized crime”. In J. J. Brent & P. B. Kraska (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of qualitative criminology (pp. 215–235). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • McSwante, J. D. (2022). Pandemic Inc.: Chasing the capitalists and thieves who got rich while we got sick. Atria/One Signal Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meuser, M., & Löscher, G. (2002). Introduction: Qualitative research in criminology. Forum qualitative sozialforschung/forum. Qualitative Social Research, 3(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J., & Palacios, W. R. (2015). Qualitative research in criminology. Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petintseva, O., Faria, R., & Eski, Y. (2020). Interviewing elites, experts and the powerful in criminology. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pontell, H. N., Tillman, R., & Ghazi-Tehrani, A. K. (2021). In-your-face Watergate: Neutralizing government lawbreaking and the war against white-collar crime. Crime, Law and Social Change, 75(3), 201–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reay, T. (2014). Publishing qualitative research. Family Business Review, 27, 95–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, C. R. (1930, 1966, 2013). The jack-roller: A delinquent boy’s own story (2nd impression ed.). University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starman, A. B. (2013). The case study as a type of qualitative research. Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies, 1, 28–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tewksbury, R. (2013). Qualitative versus quantitative methods: Understanding why qualitative methods are superior for criminology and criminal justice. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Criminology, 1(1), 38–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tewksbury, R., DeMichele, M. T., & Miller, J. M. (2005). Methodological orientation of articles appearing in Criminal Justice’s top journals: Who publishes what and where? Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 16(2), 265–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tewksbury, R., Dabney, D. A., & Copes, H. (2014). The prominence of qualitative research in criminology and criminal justice scholarship. In Advancing qualitative methods in criminology and criminal justice (pp. 12–32). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughan, D. (1996). The challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zietz, D. (1981). Women who embezzle or defraud: A study of convicted felons. Praeger Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mary Dodge .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Dodge, M., Parker, M.J. (2023). What Now and How? Publishing the Qualitative Journal Article. In: Faria, R., Dodge, M. (eds) Qualitative Research in Criminology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18401-7_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18401-7_15

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-18400-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-18401-7

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics