Validity and Reliability in Qualitative Research
Terms in this set (20)
Four types of validity [Hernon, 2001].
Degree of "representativeness." The extent to which a measure represents all facets of a given social construct.
Face validity [a type of content validity].
The extent to which a test is subjectively viewed as covering the concept it purports to measure. A weak measure.
Construct validity examines whether or not the theoretical construct or trait is measured.
Compares scores on the data collection instrument to external criteria known to measure the attribute. College Board example: the extent to which SAT scores relate to first-year GPA.
A question displays convergent validity if it has scores similar to other questions measuring the same underlying construct.
External validity is "the extent to which the results of a study can be generalized to other situations and to other people." Wikipedia.
Structural validity. Klenke .
Structural validity: The validity of a narrative is found in its structure.
Klenke . Strategies for validation in QR. 1 of 2.
1. Engagement with participants [member checking].
2. Peer debriefing.
3. Negative case analysis.
4. Bracketing. [Clarifying stance.]
5. Theoretical sampling. * not in Creswell
Klenke . Strategies for validation in QR. 2 of 2.
6. Member checks.
7. Thick description.
8. Theoretical saturation. * not in Creswell
10. Journaling [memoing].
Reliability is the degree to which an assessment tool produces stable and consistent results.
Hernon, et al, 2o11: "the extent to which the same results are produced on different samples." Consistency, stability, or accuracy from measurement to measurement.
Lincoln & Guba, 1985. Validity.
Prefer alternate terms to validity:
Creswell, 2013. Validation strategies . 1 of 2.
1. Prolonged engagement.
3. Peer review or debriefing. "Devil's advocate."
4. Negative case analysis. [Also see Locke & Golden-Biddle]
Creswell, 2013. Validation strategies . 2 of 2.
5. Clarifying researcher bias.
6. Member checking. Lincoln & Guba call this key.
7. Rich, thick description. Allows readers to make decisions about transferability.
8. External audits. From someone unconnected to the study.
As discussed in Charmaz  and elsewhere, reflexivity clarifies the presence of the researcher's voice in the process.
Creswell, 2013. Reliability strategies.
1. Importance of capturing data through recording.
2. Intercoder agreement. Notes the gap in literature of how this actually works.
Creswell, 2013. Reliability strategies in narratives.
Look for a significant issue, a chronology, a unified story, and the presence of the researcher [reflexivity].
Creswell, 2013. Indicators of quality in grounded theory studies .
1. Study looks at process, action, or interaction.
2. Coding process.
3. Presentation of the theoretical model.
4. Story line that connects categories to the model.
5. Use of memoing.
6. Reflexivity or self-disclosure of the author's stance.
Charmaz, 2013. Indicators of quality in grounded theory studies .
1. Credibility. Rich data, sufficient effort, strong logical links.
2. Originality. Fresh; new insights; social significance.
3. Resonance. Categories portray the studied experience. Study makes sense to participants, offers them deeper insights.
4. Usefulness. Generate knowledge, new research.
Triangulation: clarifying its role in QR.
Creswell, 2013 argues that triangulating data sources within a study can enrich the results.
Webster & Mertova state that triangulating data is problematic because it suggests the investigator is seeking a "truth."
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE...
Evidence Kaplan Exam
Quality, Measurement, and Data Collection
Practical Research (11-25-17)
EBP Chapter 13
OTHER SETS BY THIS CREATOR
Cards added 7.28.15
Transgender HRM Issues - Citation-only version
THIS SET IS OFTEN IN FOLDERS WITH...
Research Sampling/Qualitative Research
Braun & Clarke- Successful Qualitative Research
180 Social Science Research Terms