-
debates about rigor and validity
Controversies about quality
A major dispute has involved whether “validity” and “rigor” are appropriate.
Some reject these terms and concepts totally, some think they are appropriate, and others have searched for parallel goals.
-
terminology proliferation and confusion
no common vocabulary exists
- - goodness
- - truth value
- - integrity
- - trustworthiness
- - validity and rigor
-
controversies in qualitative research
- - some frameworks and criteria aspire to being generic - to be applicable across qualitative traditions
- - other frameworks are specific to a tradition or even to a specific analytic approach within a tradition
-
which criteria is often viewed as the "golden standard" for qualitative research?
the criteria that were outlined by Lincoln and Guba
-
is is they key goal for Lincoln and Guba's framework
trustworthiness
-
trustworthiness
- concerns the "truth value" of a qualitative data, analysis, and interpretation
- a parallel perspective, with analogs to quantitative criteria
-
Lincoln and Guba framework encompasses what five criteria?
- - credibility
- - dependability
- - confirmability
- - transferability
- - authenticity
-
credibility
- refers to confidence in the truth of the data and interpretations of them
- the analog of internal validity in quantitative research
- arguably the most important criterion for assessing the quality and integrity of a qualitative inquiry
-
dependability
- refers to stability of data overtime and over conditions
- the analog of reliability in quantitative research
-
confirmability
- refers to neutrality - the potential for congruence between two or more people about data accuracy, relevance, or meaning
- the analog of objectivity in quantitative research
-
transferability
- the extent to which findings can be transferred to other settings or groups
- the analog of generalizability or external validity in quantitative research
-
authenticity
- the extent to which the researchers fairly and faithfully show a range of different realities and convey the feeling/tone of participants' lives as they are lived
- no analog in quantitative research
- added to the Lincoln-Guba framework at a later date
-
strategies to enhance quality in qualitative inquiry
- researchers can take many steps to enhance the quality of their inquiries
- consumers can assess quality-enhancement efforts by looking for these steps and assessing their success in strengthening integrity/validity/trustworthiness
-
strategies during data collection
- prolonged engagement
- persistent observation
- reflexivity strategies
- data triangulation
- method triangulation
- comprehensive and vivid recording of information
- member checking
-
prolonged engagement
the investment of sufficient time collecting data to have in-depth understanding of the culture, language, or views of the people or group under study, to test for misinformation and distortions, and to ensure saturation of important categories
-
persistent observation
concerns the salience of the data being gathered. it refers to the researchers focus on the characteristics or aspects of a situation that are relevant to the phenomena being studied
-
reflexivity strategies
involves awareness that the researchers as an individual brings to the inquiry a unique background, set of values, and a social and professional identity that can affect the research process
-
data triangulation
the use of multiple data sources to validate conclusions [time, space, and person triangulation]
-
time triangulation
- involves collecting data on the same phenomenon or about the same people at different points in time
- similar to test-retest reliability assessment
-
space triangulation
involves collecting data on the same phenomenon in multiple sites, to test for cross-site consistency
-
person triangulation
involves collecting data from different types or levels of people [e.g., individuals, family, communities], with the aim of validating data through multiple perspectives of the phenomenon
-
method triangulation
the use of multiple methods of data collection to study the same phenomenon (e.g., self-report, observation)
-
comprehensive and vivid recording of information
Maintenance of an audit trail, a systematic collection of documentation and materials, and a decision trail that specifies decision rules
-
audit trails may include the following types of records
- the raw data [interview transcripts]
- methodologic, theoretic, and reflexive notes
- instrument development information [i.e., pilot topic guides]
- data reconstruction products [i.e. drafts of the final report]
-
member checking
providing feedback to participants about emerging interpretations; obtaining their reactions
A controversial procedure—considered essential by some but inappropriate by others
-
strategies related to coding and analysis
- investigator triangulation
- stepwise replication
- theory triangulation
- searching for discomfirming evidence and competing explanations
- negative case analysis
- peer review and debriefing
- inquiry audit
-
investigator triangulation
- use of two or more researchers to make data coding, analytic, and interpretive decision
- the thought is that through collaboration, investigators can reduce the possibility of biased decisions and idiosyncratic interpretations
-
stepwise replication
- dividing the research team into two groups to undertake parallel analyses and interpretations that are then compared
- associated with Lincoln-Guba dependability criterion
-
theory triangulation
use of competing theories, hypothesis, or conceptualizations in the analysis and interpretation of data
-
searching for discomfirming evidence and competing explanations
- Search for disconfirming evidence as the analysis proceeds, through purposive/theoretical sampling of cases that can challenge interpretations
- this strategy depends on concurrent data collection and data analysis; researchers cannot look for discomfirming data unless they have a sense of what they need to know
-
negative case analysis
- a specific search for cases that appear to discredit earlier critical feedback
- this strategy is a process by which researchers review their interpretations by including cases that appear to disconfirm earlier hypotheses
-
peer review and debriefing
sessions with peers specifically designed to elict critical feedback
-
inquiry audit
- a formal scrutiny of the data and relevant supporting documents and decisions by an external reviewer
- can be a good tool for persuading other that qualitative data are worthy of confidence
-
strategies relating to presentation
Thick and contextualized description: vivid portrayal of study participants, their context, and the phenomenon under study
Researcher credibility: enhancing confidence by sharing relevant aspects of the researcher’s experience, credentials, and motivation
-
Interpretation of Qualitative Findings
Interpretation in qualitative inquiry—making meaning from the data—relies on adequate incubation.
Similar interpretive issues as in quantitative research: credibility, meaning, importance, transferability, and implications
-
incubation
is the process of living the data, a process in which researchers must try to understand their meanings, find their essential pattern, and draw well-grounded, insightful conclusions.
|
|