Qualitative Claim Quick Check
Paste your findings or discussion and see the wording reviewers question.
This is a wording check that runs entirely in your browser. It flags sentences where the wording reaches past a qualitative sample — and scans for the rigor markers reviewers look for. It does not read your transcripts, does not judge whether your research is sound, and does not decide anything. Nothing is uploaded. Qualitative subjectivity is a method, not a fault — the flags are prompts to check, not verdicts.
No account · no upload · nothing leaves your browser.
What this checks
- Theme stated without a quote — a finding or theme sentence with no participant quote or excerpt in it.
- Quantifying language — "most", "the majority", "often", "%", "n=". A purposive sample can't show how common something is.
- Generalizing beyond the sample — "all nurses", "everyone", "proves", "generalizable". Purposive samples aren't representative.
- Causal claims — "caused by", "leads to", "results in", "because of". Most qualitative designs explain how and why, not cause and effect.
- Loaded or evaluative wording — "obviously", "clearly", "simply", "failed to", "shockingly". Wording that can carry your judgement rather than participants' meaning.
- Rigor-marker scan — whether the text mentions member checking, triangulation, reflexivity, saturation, a second coder, an audit trail, thick description, or COREQ/SRQR.
What it can't do. Heuristics see wording, not data. They can't open your transcripts, can't tell
whether a theme is grounded, and a clean result is not a clearance. Whether your interpretation holds is a judgement
for you, your co-authors, and your reviewers — not this tool.