0% found this document useful (0 votes)
48 views25 pages

Trustworthiness and Integrity in Qualitative Research

Uploaded by

cross
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
48 views25 pages

Trustworthiness and Integrity in Qualitative Research

Uploaded by

cross
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 25

Chapter 17

Trustworthiness and Integrity in


Qualitative Research
Debates About Rigor and Validity

• Controversies about quality


– What should the key quality-related goals be, and
what terminology should be used?
• 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.

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Terminology Proliferation and Confusion

• No common vocabulary exists.


– Goodness
– Truth value
– Integrity
– Trustworthiness
– Validity and rigor

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


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.

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Question

Tell whether the following statement is True or False.


A major controversy involving qualitative research is that a
relatively small amount of terminology is used.
a.True
b.False

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Answer

b. False
Rationale: A major dispute involving qualitative research is
whether validity and rigor are appropriate terms. In
addition, there has been a proliferation of terminology,
leading to controversy.

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Two Quality Frameworks

• Lincoln and Guba—often considered the “gold standard,”


and are widely cited

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Lincoln and Guba’s Framework

• Key goal: trustworthiness


– Concerns the “truth value” of qualitative data, analysis,
and interpretation
• A parallel perspective, with analogs to quantitative criteria
• Encompasses four criteria:
– Credibility
– Dependability
– Confirmability
– Transferability

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Lincoln and Guba’s: Credibility

• Involves two aspects: (1) carrying out the study in a way


that enhances the believability of the findings and (2)
taking steps to demonstrate credibility to external
readers
• 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

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Dependability

• Refers to stability of data over time and over


conditions
• The analog of reliability in quantitative research

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Confirmability

• Refers to objectivity—the potential for congruence


between two or more independent people about data
accuracy, relevance, or meaning
• The analog of objectivity in quantitative research
• This criterion is concerned with establishing that the
data represent the information participants provided
and that the interpretations of those data are not
imagined by the inquirer.

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Transferability

• The extent to which qualitative findings can be


transferred to other settings or groups
• The analog of generalizability or external validity in
quantitative research

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Question

What is the key goal of the Lincoln and Guba’s framework?


a.Dependability
b.Credibility
c.Trustworthiness
d.Confirmability

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Answer

c. Trustworthiness
Rationale: The key goal of the Lincoln and Guba’s
framework is trustworthiness, which encompasses
dependability, credibility, confirmability, transferability, and
authenticity.

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


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 and Guba’s framework at a later
date

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


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.

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Strategies During Data Collection

• Prolonged engagement: investing sufficient time to


have in-depth understanding
• Persistent observation: intensive focus on salience of
data being gathered
• Reflexivity strategies: attending to researcher’s effect
on data

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Strategies During Data Collection—
(cont.)

• 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
• Member checking: providing feedback to participants
about emerging interpretations; obtaining their reactions
– A controversial procedure—considered essential by
some but inappropriate by others

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Data and Method Triangulation: Denzin

• Data triangulation: the use of multiple data sources to


validate conclusions (time, space, and person
triangulation)
• Investigator triangulation: not relevant to data
collection
• Method triangulation: the use of multiple methods of
data collection to study the same phenomenon (e.g.,
self-report, observation)
• Theory triangulation: not relevant to data collection

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Strategies Relating to Coding and Analysis

• Search for disconfirming evidence as the analysis


proceeds, through purposive/theoretical sampling of
cases that can challenge interpretations
• Negative case analysis: a specific search for cases
that appear to discredit earlier hypotheses
• Peer review and debriefing: sessions with peers
specifically designed to elicit critical feedback
• Inquiry audit: a formal scrutiny of the data and
relevant supporting documents and decisions by an
external reviewer

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


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

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Question

Tell whether the following statement is True or False.


Persistent observation is a quality-enhancement strategy
useful for coding and analysis.
a.True
b.False

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Answer

b. False
Rationale: Persistent observation is a quality-enhancement
strategy useful while generating data.

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


Interpretation of Qualitative Findings

• Interpretation in qualitative inquiry—making meaning


from the data—relies on adequate incubation.
– The process of living the data
• Similar interpretive issues as in quantitative research:
credibility, meaning, importance, transferability, and
implications

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved


End of Presentation

Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer · All Rights Reserved

You might also like