The DORR Framework: Reframing Trustworthiness Criteria for Hermeneutic Research.

Abstract

Background: This article introduces a reflexive methodological framework for evaluating the quality of hermeneutic research, grounded in interpretive epistemologies and a reinterpretation of Lincoln and Guba's classic trustworthiness criteria. While hermeneutic inquiry has become increasingly significant, few frameworks explicitly align quality evaluation with its ontological and epistemological foundations. Existing standards often reflect post-positivist ideals of neutrality and replicability, creating tension with the philosophical assumptions of hermeneutics.

Aim: The aim of this article was to develop and present the DORR Framework, a hermeneutically grounded and philosophically coherent structure for assessing interpretive rigour in hermeneutic research as a whole.

Design: The framework synthesizes insights from philosophical hermeneutics caring science and qualitative methodology. Lincoln and Guba's trustworthiness criteria, credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability are reinterpreted through hermeneutic principles, resulting in four dimensions: Depth, Openness, Resonance, and Reflexivity.

Results: Each dimension is operationalised through reflective questions designed to support researchers in demonstrating interpretive depth, dialogical openness, contextual resonance, and reflexive accountability, while avoiding procedural reductionism.

Conclusion: The DORR Framework offers a philosophically coherent yet practically applicable approach to evaluating hermeneutic inquiry. By fostering epistemological transparency, ethical integrity, and scholarly reflexivity, it equips researchers, supervisors, and reviewers with a means of assessing quality that is consistent with the philosophical and ethical foundations of caring science, including attentiveness to human dignity, suffering, and responsible knowledge development in health-related research.