Navigating the meta-crisis of generativity: adapting qualitative research quality criteria in the era of generative AI

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 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.