How Can Generative AI (GenAI) Enhance or Hinder Qualitative Studies? A Critical Appraisal from South Asia, Nepal

Qualitative researchers can benefit from using generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), such as different versions of ChatGPT—GPT-3.5 or GPT-4, Google Bard—now renamed as a Gemini, and Bing Chat—now renamed as a Copilot, in their studies. The scientific community has used artificial intelligence (AI) tools in various ways. However, using GenAI has generated concerns regarding potential research unreliability, bias, and unethical outcomes in GenAI-generated research results. Considering these concerns, the purpose of this commentary is to review the current use of GenAI in qualitative research, including its strengths, limitations, and ethical dilemmas from the perspective of critical appraisal from South Asia, Nepal. I explore the controversy surrounding the proper acknowledgment of GenAI or AI use in qualitative studies and how GenAI can support or challenge qualitative studies. First, I discuss what qualitative researchers need to know about GenAI in their research. Second, I examine how GenAI can be a valuable tool in qualitative research as a co-author, a conversational platform, and a research assistant for enhancing and hindering qualitative studies. Third, I address the ethical issues of using GenAI in qualitative studies. Fourth, I share my perspectives on the future of GenAI in qualitative research. I would like to recognize and record the utilization of GenAI and/or AI alongside my cognitive and evaluative abilities in constructing this critical appraisal. I offer ethical guidance on when and how to appropriately recognize the use of GenAI in qualitative studies. Finally, I offer some remarks on the implications of using GenAI in qualitative studies