Reliability & Validity

Reliability & Validity
Qualitative Research Methods
ON TARGET

Qual vs. Quant
The quantitative study must convince the reader that procedures have been followed faithfully because very little concrete description of what anyone does is provided. The qualitative study provides the reader with a depiction in enough detail to show that the authors conclusion makes sense. . . The quantitative study portrays a world of variables and static states. By contrast the qualitative study describes people acting in events.
(Firestone, 1987, p. 19)
ON TARGET

Challenges
1.What can you possibly tell from an n of 1? 2. What is it worth to just get the researchers interpretation of what is taking place?
3. How can you generalize from a small, nonrandom sample?
ON TARGET

Challenges
4. If the researcher is the primary instrument for data collection and analysis, how can we be sure the researcher is a valid and reliable instrument?
5. How will you know when to stop collecting data?
ON TARGET

Challenges
6. Isnt the researcher biased and just finding out what he or she expects to find? 7. Without hypotheses, how will you know what youre looking for? 8. Dont people lie to field researchers?
ON TARGET

Challenges
9. Doesnt the researchers presence result in a change in participants normal behavior, thus contaminating the data? 10. If somebody else did the study, would they get the same results?
ON TARGET

Criteria
Some argue that qualitative researchers should consider validity and reliability from the philosophical assumptions underlying the chosen paradigm.
ON TARGET

Qual vs. Quant Criteria
Quantitative
Internal Validity External Validity Reliability Objectivity
Qualitative
Credibility Transferability Dependability Confirmability
ON TARGET

Criteria
Credibility: the extent to which interpretations can be validated as true, correct, and dependable
- Is the study believable from the perspective of those observed, does it ring true to the people studied? - Is the data complete?
ON TARGET

Criteria Credibility: Some argue one can never truly discover the reality of a situation and should look for whats credible instead. - Validity is relative - Humans are closer to the truth than if a data collection instrument had been interjected between us and the participants
ON TARGET

Criteria
Credibility: Use triangulation to overcome inherent flaws - data - investigator - interdisciplinary - theory
ON TARGET

Criteria
Credibility: Have adequate engagement in data collection, a.k.a, saturation

- Holistic
- Look for data that supports alternate explanations
ON TARGET

Criteria
Credibility: Employ reflexivity
Reflexivity: the process of reflecting critically upon the self as the researcher, the human instrument
ON TARGET

Criteria
Transferability: degree to which the results can be applied to other settings/situations - Researcher supplies thick (detailed) descriptions - Pays careful attention to the sample
ON TARGET

Criteria
Transferability:
In qualitative research, a singe case or small, nonrandom, purposeful sample is selected precisely because the researcher wishes to understand the particular in depth, not to find out what is generally true of the many.
(Merriam, 2009, 224)
ON TARGET

Criteria
Dependability: concerned with whether or not the findings can be duplicated/repeated - Describes changes in the setting and how those changes affected the research
ON TARGET

Criteria
Dependability: Difficult because human behavior is constantly changing - many interpretations - no benchmarks or static means of measurements - similarity of answers does not ensure accuracy
ON TARGET

Criteria
Dependability: More important to ask if whether the results are consistent with the data collected
ON TARGET

Criteria
Dependability: Strategies to help with dependability: - triangulation - peer examination - investigators position - audit trail
ON TARGET

Criteria
Dependability: Audit trail: independent readers can authenticate the findings of a study by following the trail of the researcher
ON TARGET

Criteria
Confirmability: the degree to which the results can be corroborated by others

- Results should be well-reasoned - The results of the study vs. the researchers bias?
ON TARGET

Criteria
Confirmability: One concern is reactivity - How the act of observation changes a situation
ON TARGET

Criteria
Different criteria apply to different methods i.e. In narrative analysis look for what tells a persuasive story in a narrative way vs. the thick description needed in an ethnography of a cultural group
ON TARGET

Evaluating Research
1.Are the methods of research appropriate to the nature of the question being asked? 2. Is the connection to an existing body of knowledge or theory clear? 3.Are there clear accounts of the criteria used for the selection of cases for study and of the data collection and analysis?
ON TARGET

Evaluating Research 4. Does the sensitivity of the methods match the needs of the research question?
5.Were the data collection and record keeping systematic? 6. Is reference made to accepted procedures for analysis?
ON TARGET

Evaluating Research 7. How systematic is the analysis?
8. Is there adequate discussion of how themes, concepts and categories were derived from the data?
ON TARGET

Evaluating Research 9. Is there adequate discussion of the evidence for and against the researchers arguments? 10. Is a clear distinction made between the data and their interpretation?
ON TARGET
Qualitative Research Methods

Reliability &amp; Validity

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Reliability &amp; Validity

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Reliability & Validity

Qualitative Research Methods