Generative Artificial Intelligence in Qualitative Research Methods: Between Hype and Risks?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.08461v1
• Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 01:59:47 GMT
• Title: Generative Artificial Intelligence in Qualitative Research Methods: Between Hype and Risks?
• Abstract summary: This position paper critically interrogates the role of generative AI (genAI) in the context of qualitative coding methodologies.<n>Despite widespread hype and claims of efficiency, we propose that genAI is not methodologically valid within qualitative inquiries.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: As Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly promoted and used in qualitative research, it also raises profound methodological issues. This position paper critically interrogates the role of generative AI (genAI) in the context of qualitative coding methodologies. Despite widespread hype and claims of efficiency, we propose that genAI is not methodologically valid within qualitative inquiries, and its use risks undermining the robustness and trustworthiness of qualitative research. The lack of meaningful documentation, commercial opacity, and the inherent tendencies of genAI systems to produce incorrect outputs all contribute to weakening methodological rigor. Overall, the balance between risk and benefits does not support the use of genAI in qualitative research, and our position paper cautions researchers to put sound methodology before technological novelty.

Related papers

• Antipatterns in AI-assisted Qualitative Data Analysis: A Catalog of Temptations and Pitfalls for Software Engineering Researchers [10.90476284349459]
  This paper presents a catalog of antipatterns in AI-assisted qualitative data analysis.<n>The antipatterns are grouped into three categories reflecting escalating impact: Dangerous Drivers, Operational Missteps, and Analytical Failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-28T05:07:25Z)
• Taking a Pulse on How Generative AI is Reshaping the Software Engineering Research Landscape [10.576800319451133]
  We conduct a large-scale survey of software engineering (SE) researchers publishing in top venues between 2023 and 2025.<n>We examine who uses Generative AI (GenAI) and why, where it is used across research activities, and how researchers perceive its benefits, opportunities, challenges, risks, and governance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-13T08:43:56Z)
• GenAI Is No Silver Bullet for Qualitative Research in Software Engineering [12.444212651043593]
  We discuss the emerging use of generative AI (GenAI) in relation to the broad spectrum of qualitative research in software engineering.<n>Our goal is to inform researchers about the promises and pitfalls of GenAI-assisted qualitative research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-09T21:35:36Z)
• The Verification Crisis: Expert Perceptions of GenAI Disinformation and the Case for Reproducible Provenance [47.03825808787752]
  This article presents findings from the first wave of a longitudinal expert perception survey (N=21) involving AI researchers, policymakers, and disinformation specialists.<n>It examines the perceived severity of multimodal threats -- text, image, audio, and video -- and evaluates current mitigation strategies.<n>Results indicate that while deepfake video presents immediate "shock" value, large-scale text generation poses a systemic risk of "epistemic fragmentation"
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-02T13:45:12Z)
• Not Everything That Counts Can Be Counted: A Case for Safe Qualitative AI [2.943914288677608]
  We argue for developing dedicated qualitative AI systems built from the ground up for interpretive research.<n>We review recent literature to show how existing automated discovery pipelines could be enhanced by robust qualitative capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-12T13:36:58Z)
• Development and Benchmarking of a Blended Human-AI Qualitative Research Assistant [1.170789976854236]
  We benchmark Muse, an interactive, AI-powered qualitative research system.<n>We find an inter-rater reliability between Muse and humans of Cohen's $$ = 0.71 for well-specified codes.<n>We also conduct robust error analysis to identify failure mode, guide future improvements, and demonstrate the capacity to correct for human bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-14T21:17:34Z)
• A Review of Generative AI in Computer Science Education: Challenges and Opportunities in Accuracy, Authenticity, and Assessment [2.1891582280781634]
  This paper surveys the use of Generative AI tools, such as ChatGPT and Claude, in computer science education.<n>Generative AI raises concerns such as AI hallucinations, error propagation, bias, and blurred lines between AI-assisted and student-authored content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-17T19:20:58Z)
• The AI Imperative: Scaling High-Quality Peer Review in Machine Learning [49.87236114682497]
  We argue that AI-assisted peer review must become an urgent research and infrastructure priority.<n>We propose specific roles for AI in enhancing factual verification, guiding reviewer performance, assisting authors in quality improvement, and supporting ACs in decision-making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-09T18:37:14Z)
• Information Retrieval in the Age of Generative AI: The RGB Model [77.96475639967431]
  This paper presents a novel quantitative approach to shed light on the complex information dynamics arising from the growing use of generative AI tools.<n>We propose a model to characterize the generation, indexing, and dissemination of information in response to new topics.<n>Our findings suggest that the rapid pace of generative AI adoption, combined with increasing user reliance, can outpace human verification, escalating the risk of inaccurate information proliferation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-29T10:21:40Z)
• Computational Safety for Generative AI: A Signal Processing Perspective [65.268245109828]
  computational safety is a mathematical framework that enables the quantitative assessment, formulation, and study of safety challenges in GenAI.<n>We show how sensitivity analysis and loss landscape analysis can be used to detect malicious prompts with jailbreak attempts.<n>We discuss key open research challenges, opportunities, and the essential role of signal processing in computational AI safety.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T02:26:50Z)
• Navigating Ethical Challenges in Generative AI-Enhanced Research: The ETHICAL Framework for Responsible Generative AI Use [0.0]
  The rapid adoption of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in research presents both opportunities and ethical challenges.<n>This paper develops the ETHICAL framework, which is a practical guide for responsible GenAI use in research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-11T05:49:11Z)
• Evaluating Generative AI-Enhanced Content: A Conceptual Framework Using Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed-Methods Approaches [0.0]
  Generative AI (GenAI) has revolutionized content generation, offering transformative capabilities for improving language coherence, readability, and overall quality.<n>This manuscript explores the application of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods research approaches to evaluate the performance of GenAI models in enhancing scientific writing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-26T23:34:07Z)
• Generative AI in Health Economics and Outcomes Research: A Taxonomy of Key Definitions and Emerging Applications, an ISPOR Working Group Report [12.204470166456561]
  Generative AI shows significant potential in health economics and outcomes research (HEOR)<n>Generative AI shows significant potential in HEOR, enhancing efficiency, productivity, and offering novel solutions to complex challenges.<n>Foundation models are promising in automating complex tasks, though challenges remain in scientific reliability, bias, interpretability, and workflow integration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-26T15:42:50Z)
• Generative AI Tools in Academic Research: Applications and Implications for Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methodologies [0.0]
  This study examines the impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) on academic research, focusing on its application to qualitative and quantitative data analysis. GenAI tools evolve rapidly, they offer new possibilities for enhancing research productivity and democratising complex analytical processes. Their integration into academic practice raises significant questions regarding research integrity and security, authorship, and the changing nature of scholarly work.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-13T13:10:03Z)
• Human-Centric Multimodal Machine Learning: Recent Advances and Testbed on AI-based Recruitment [66.91538273487379]
  There is a certain consensus about the need to develop AI applications with a Human-Centric approach. Human-Centric Machine Learning needs to be developed based on four main requirements: (i) utility and social good; (ii) privacy and data ownership; (iii) transparency and accountability; and (iv) fairness in AI-driven decision-making processes. We study how current multimodal algorithms based on heterogeneous sources of information are affected by sensitive elements and inner biases in the data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-13T16:44:44Z)
• The Role of AI in Drug Discovery: Challenges, Opportunities, and Strategies [97.5153823429076]
  The benefits, challenges and drawbacks of AI in this field are reviewed. The use of data augmentation, explainable AI, and the integration of AI with traditional experimental methods are also discussed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-08T23:23:39Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.