{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014669926650366748, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0024449877750611247, 'mean_word_length': 6.121739130434783, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
On Improving Qualitative Methods in Public Administration Research

What do exemplary qualitative accounts look like, and how do they convince readers of their correctness? What sort of standards can be used to assess qualitative research accounts for public administration? To address these questions, the authors examined 72 recent qualitative research journal articles. Proceeding from a set of preliminary guidelines, they worked iteratively between articles and the emergent template to produce refined guidelines. In addition, they identified specific types of dilemmas for public bureaucracies and policies that trigger researchers’ strategies for persuading readers that their qualitative accounts are credible. They conclude with four actionable recommendations for improving the field’s qualitative research.