PERSPECTIVE article
Front. Res. Metr. Anal.
Sec. Research Methods
Volume 10 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/frma.2025.1685968
This article is part of the Research TopicResearch Ethics and Integrity in the Artificial Intelligence EraView all 9 articles
Navigating the Meta-Crisis of Generativity: Adapting Qualitative Research Quality Criteria in the Era of Generative AI
Provisionally accepted
- 1Kathmandu University School of Education, Patan, Nepal
- 2Department of English, United International University, Dhaka, Bangladesh
- 3Centre for Foundation and Continuing Education, University Malaysia Terengganu, Malaysia, Malaysia
- 4Department of English and Modern Languages, International University of Business Agriculture and Technology, Dhaka, Bangladesh
- 5Kathmandu University School of Education, Lalitpur, Nepal
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Integrating generative AI (GenAI) in qualitative research offers innovation but intensifies core epistemological, ontological, and ethical challenges. This article conceptualizes the meta-crisis of generativity—a convergence of Denzin and Lincoln's (2005) three crises: representation (blurring human/AI authorship), legitimation (questioning trust in AI-generated claims), and praxis (ambiguity in non-human participation). We examine how human-GenAI collaboration challenges researchers' voice, knowledge validity, and ethical agency across research paradigms. To navigate this, we propose strategic approaches: preserving positionality via voice annotation and reflexive bracketing (representation); ensuring trustworthiness through algorithmic audits and adapted validity checklists (legitimation); and redefining agency via participatory transparency and posthuman ethics (praxis). Synthesizing these, we expand qualitative rigor criteria—such as credibility and reflexivity—into collaborative frameworks that emphasize algorithmic accountability. The meta-crisis is thus an invitation to reanimate the critical ethos of qualitative research through interdisciplinary collaboration, balancing the potential of GenAI with ethical accountability while preserving humanistic foundations.
Keywords: Generative AI, qualitative research, Crisis of representation, Crisis of Legitimation, Crisis of Praxis, Algorithmic bias, Posthuman ethics
Received: 14 Aug 2025; Accepted: 16 Oct 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Dahal, Hasan, Ounissi, Haque and Kapar. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Niroj Dahal, niroj@kusoed.edu.np
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.