Validity and reliability in qualitative research

Establishing Validity in Qualitative Research Establishing Validity in Qualitative Research The following module discusses reliability and validity in qualitative research, with an emphasis on establishing credibility and transferability.

Validity and reliability in qualitative research

ABSTRACT With reference to definitions of validity and reliability, and drawing extensively on conceptualizations of qualitative research, this essay examines the correlation between the reliability of effort to find answers to questions about the social world, and the validity of conclusions drawn from such attempts.

Establishing Validity in Qualitative Research - Center for Innovation in Research and Teaching

This is to point out the fundamental position to the role of theory in relation to research; as an inductivist strategy qualitative research tries to confer the correspondence between reality and representation. The problem of validity and reliability in qualitative research is entwined with the definition of qualitative research and the possibility to mirror this in practice to make a qualitative research properly valid and reliable.

That presents both challenges and chances to qualitative researchers; yet, with taking into consideration qualitative criteria in social research, achieving validity and as well as reliability in qualitative research is not impossible. Such an abstract definition is all-encompassing that includes various research strategies, designs and methods.

Therefore, it does not tell much about the questions and the answers, and the correlation between both in relation to the researched subject matter. The difficulty and disagreement lies in finding answers to questions about a subject matter that is in slow motion and continuous change, to identify and observe a moving target: The debate, currently, is one between two traditions in social research, namely quantitative and qualitative.

Each tradition, in turn, has different ontological and epistemological standpoint in relation to the social Validity and reliability in qualitative research. In a metaphorical sense, it is like looking through different lenses, viewing the social world differently; different things seem important and hence seek finding answers to different questions.

That is, the quantitative research regards the social world as separate to the observer; such an ontological objectivism subsequently breeds a positivist epistemological alignment to view the social world as a measurable object.

The qualitative research, on the contrary, ontologically takes the social world as a construct of the researcher and the researched, and thus, is epistemologically interpretivist.

This essay discusses the qualitative research, and its possibility to be valid and reliable, I regard this as central to the social research debate.

Validity and reliability in qualitative research

The core question is can qualitative research be appropriately valid and reliable? Having said this, this essay is an answer to the question, not the answer, and it is an interpretation to the debate.

The problem to be addressed is imperative because it aims to examine the correlation between the reliability of effort to find answers to questions about the social world, and the validity of conclusions drawn from such an attempt.

In other words, it is pointing out the fundamental position to the role of theory in relation to research, as an inductivist research strategy, to confer the correspondence between reality and representation.

Credibility

This paper argues that the problem of validity and reliability in qualitative research is entwined with the definition of qualitative research, though some scholars argue that qualitative research is not as valid and reliable as quantitative research, this essay argues that it is possible for qualitative research to be properly valid and reliable, taking into consideration qualitative criteria in social research, including its designs and methods.

In three sections the essay offers an answer the addressed question; in the first section it defines qualitative research and hence deconstructing the question relies on how qualitative research is defined.

The second section addresses the matter of validity and the third section takes the issues of reliability in qualitative research. Finally based on what would be discussed through out, the paper offers a conclusion. The problem with defining qualitative research, however, is that there is more than one type of qualitative research.

For example, Gurbrium and Holsten identify four traditions in qualitative research: If one pays close attention to all those four traditions one can observe some common characteristic; that first, centrality of social reality and humans; second, investigating a changing reality; third, interpreting the researched reality in a constructive manner, that the researched contributes meaning to the research and fourth, attempt to understand and seek meaning.

In other words, a qualitative strategy can be best understood in relation to a quantitative strategy, by contrasting both. Bryman has highlighted some common contrasts between quantitative and qualitative researches, as the following table shows: It is true that both qualitative and quantitative strategies are different but they complement each other in the broader spectrum of social research.

I believe that managing the tension between reality and representation, is a conclusion that we may arrive at, after identifying our approach and defining our research strategy.

As a substantiated strategy to the conduct of social research, qualitative research provides a distinctive framework for data collection and analysis and offers divers techniques for collecting data.

Some examples of qualitative research designs are, experimental, cross-sectional, longitude, and case study. As to the qualitative research methodologies, examples are, participant observation, ethnography, interviews, focus groups and conversational and textual analysis see, Lawrence Neuman, ; Bryman Process here is taken as a synonym to change in a given context, and the context is a social one - be it a group or a community that has been researched.

Third, epistemologically qualitative research is interpertivist:Please suggest some new articles in the context of Validity and Reliability in Qualitative research method.

The problem of validity and reliability in qualitative research is entwined with the definition of qualitative research and the possibility to mirror this in practice to make a qualitative research properly valid and reliable.

Validity in Qualitative Research. How do we assess and assure Validity in Qualitative Research?? This can be a bit of a tricky topic, as qualitative research involves humans understanding humans, a necessarily subjective practice from the get-go.

In the world of academic research, data is gathered using either quantitative or qualitative techniques. Quantitative methods include using test scores, number counts and other procedures that use hard numbers to make assessments. A large problem, despite the sources already alluded to in the responses, so far, is that 'trustworthiness' is a more appropriate context to use in .

Like reliability and validity as used in quantitative research are providing springboard to examine what these two terms mean in the qualitative research paradigm, triangulation as used in quantitative research to test the reliability and validity can also illuminate some ways to test or maximize the validity and reliability of a qualitative study.

Social Research Methods - Knowledge Base - Qualitative Validity