Kredibilitas Penelitian Kualitatif Bimbingan dan Konseling Melalui Statistik Terapan: Systematic Literature Review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31004/jpion.v4i4.858Keywords:
Statistik Terapan, Sistematic Literature Review, Evidence-Based Counseling, Validitas Penelitian Kualitatif, Bimbingan dan KonselingAbstract
Penelitian bimbingan dan konseling (BK) membutuhkan dukungan data yang terukur, terutama ketika paradigma konseling berbasis bukti menuntut akurasi tanpa mengurangi makna fenomenologis. Kajian ini menggunakan pendekatan Systematic Literature Review (SLR) berbasis PRISMA 2020 dengan menelaah publikasi ilmiah tahun 2015–2025 yang terindeks Scopus, ERIC, dan Google Scholar. Sebanyak 32 artikel memenuhi kriteria inklusi dan dianalisis secara tematik untuk memetakan pola integrasi statistik dalam penelitian kualitatif BK. Temuan kajian menunjukkan tiga fungsi utama statistik: (1) memberikan informasi deskriptif mengenai karakteristik partisipan dan konteks penelitian, (2) mendukung validitas dan triangulasi data kualitatif, serta (3) memperkuat rancangan metode campuran (mixed methods). Statistik terbukti meningkatkan credibility, dependability, confirmability, dan transferability. Integrasi statistik secara proporsional mendorong pengembangan metodologi berbasis bukti yang tetap menjaga nilai humanistik dalam penelitian konseling.
References
American Counseling Association. (2023). Code of ethics. Alexandria, VA: Author.
Bazeley, P. (2018). Integrating analyses in mixed methods research. SAGE Publications.
Barker, M., Gill, R., & Harvey, L. (2016). Researching psychology qualitatively. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2018.1504362
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597.
Castleberry, A., & Nolen, A. (2018). Thematic analysis made easy. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 10(6), 807–815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2018.03.019
Chen, W., Wu, C., & Tsai, C. (2022). Integration of quantitative support in qualitative educational research: Methodological reflections. Educational Research Review, 36(3), 100–117.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100117
Cho, J., & Trent, A. (2016). Validity in qualitative research revisited. Qualitative Research, 16(3), 315–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794115605912
Chong, S. W., Lin, T. J., & Chen, Y. (2022). A methodological review of systematic literature reviews in higher education. Educational Research Review, 35, 100426.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100426
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Fetters, M. D., & Freshwater, D. (2015). The 1 + 1 = 3 integration challenge. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9(2), 115–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815581222
Frost, N. (2019). Triangulation in qualitative research. Qualitative Research Journal, 19(3), 194–200. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-12-2018-0012
Gobo, G. (2015). The next challenge: Blending quantitative and qualitative techniques. Qualitative Research, 15(7), 734–752.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794114557997
Hesse-Biber, S. (2016). Qualitative approaches to mixed methods practice. Qualitative Inquiry, 22(9), 723–728. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800415617201
Hill, C. E. (2015). Consensual qualitative research (CQR): Reporting frequencies in qualitative data. The Counseling Psychologist, 43(2), 193–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000014564794
Korstjens, I., & Moser, A. (2018). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. European Journal of General Practice, 24(1), 120–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2017.1375092
Levitt, H. M., et al. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for qualitative primary, qualitative meta-analytic, and mixed methods research. Psychotherapy Research, 28(3), 379–396.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2018.1480436
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
Matos, J. F., Piedade, J., & Freitas, A. (2023). Teaching and learning research methodologies in education: A systematic literature review. Education Sciences, 13(2), 173.
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13020173
Maxwell, J. A. (2021). Conceptualizing and evaluating validity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 21(2), 160–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794118784236
McLeod, J. (2019). Qualitative research in counselling and psychotherapy (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Morrow, S. L. (2018). Rigor in qualitative research in the social sciences. American Psychologist, 73(2), 103–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000147
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2019). Enhancing the interpretation of significant findings: The role of mixed and quantitative elements in qualitative studies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 22(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2018.1504362
Page, M. J., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2016). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Blackwell Publishing.
Plano Clark, V. L. (2019). Meaningful integration of qualitative and quantitative data. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(3), 284–295.
Sandelowski, M. (2015). A matter of numbers: The role of counting in qualitative research. Research in Nursing & Health, 38(1), 1–11.
https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.21770
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Solehuddin, M., Widiawati, E., & Nuraeni, A. (2023). Descriptive statistics in qualitative education research. Journal of Educational Studies, 12(3), 45–58.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2020). Foundations of mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Torres-Carrión, P. V., González-González, C. S., Aciar, S., & Rodríguez-Morales, G. (2018). Methodology for systematic literature review applied to engineering and education. IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 1364–1373.
https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2018.8363386
Watts, L. L., Todd, E. M., & Mulhearn, T. J. (2017). Qualitative evaluation methods in ethics education: A systematic review and analysis of best practices. Accountability in Research, 24(4), 225–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2016.1274979
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Windri Citrawardhani, Ahman, Agus Taufiq
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
