LEAD 901 Chapter 10

Chapter 10
Standards of
Validation and
Evaluation

Questions for Discussion
• What are some perspectives on validation within
the qualitative community?
• What are some alternative procedures useful in
establishing validation in qualitative research?
• How is reliability realized in qualitative research?
• What are some alternative stances on evaluating
the quality of qualitative research?
• How do these stances differ by types of
approaches to qualitative inquiry?
2Creswell, Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design 4e.
SAGE Publishing, 2018.

Perspectives on Validation (1)

• Lincoln & Guba, 1985, Establish
trustworthiness
– Credibility
– Authenticity
– Transferability
– Dependability
– Confirmability
• Eisner, 1991: Credibility vs. validation

Lather (1991)
• Triangulation
• Construct validity
• Face validity
• Catalytic validation
Lather (1993)
• Ironic validation
• Truth as problem
• Paralogic validation:
• Undecidables
• Rhizomatic validation:
• Without rooted
connections
• Voluptuous validation:
• Understand more than
can know

• Creswell and Poth
– Establish accuracy of findings
– Made through time in field, thick description,
closeness to participants
– A process
– Not distinct validation for qualitative
approaches
– Use multiple validation strategies

Validation Strategies

Reliability Perspectives and
Procedures
• Intercoder agreement of multiple coders
• Procedures
– Establish common platform and preliminary code list
– Define and share initial codebook
– Apply codebook to additional transcripts and compare
– Assess and report intercoder agreement (e.g., same
code assigned to the passage)
– Revise and finalize the codebook for further coding

Evaluation Criteria:
Howe & Eisenhardt (1990)
• Research questions drive data and
analysis
• Technical application of data and analysis
• Researcher’s assumptions made explicit
• Overall warrant is robust
• Study has ‘value’ (So what?)

Lincoln (1995)
• Standards within inquiry community
• Positionality and standpoint epistemology
• Rubric of community
• Voice of participants
• Critical subjectivity
• Reciprocity between researcher and researched
• Sacredness of relationships (research-to-action)
• Sharing of privileges

Richardson (2005)
• Richardson (2005) identified four criteria
for social science publication
– Substantive contribution
– Aesthetic merit
– Reflexivity
– Impact

Narrative Research (1)
• Denzin 1989: Criteria of interpretation
• Plummer 1983: Life history
– Is individual representative?
– What are sources of bias?
– Is account valid when
• Ask subjects to read?
• Compare to official records?
• Compare to accounts from other participants?

Narrative Research (2)
Creswell and Poth
• Focus on single individual (or 2-3)
• Collect stories about significant issue
• Develop connecting chronology
• Tell story that reports
• What said
• How said
• How speakers interact
• Reflexively bring self into study

Phenomenological Research (1)
• Polkinghorne 1989: Structural connections
– Did interviewer influence contents?
– Is transcription accurate?
– Could other conclusions have been derived?
– General structural description to
transcriptions?
– Structural description hold in other situations?

• Van Manen (2014):
– Heuristic questioning
– Descriptive richness
– Interpretive depth
– Strong, addressive meaning
– Experiential awakening
– Inceptual Epiphany

Creswell and Poth
• Clear phenomenon concisely articulated
• Convey understanding of philosophical tenets
• Procedures of data analysis in phenomenology
• Essence includes description of experience & context
• Author reflexive

Grounded Theory Research (1)
• Strauss & Corbin, 2015 16 checkpoints of
methodological consistency
– Target population, How sample selected
– How sampling proceeded
– Data collection alternate with analysis
– Ethical considerations
– Data collection arrived at through analysis
– Theoretical sampling
– Sensitivity to participants
– Evidence of memos

• Strauss & Corbin, 2015 16 Checkpoints (cont.)
– End of data collection and saturation
– Description of coding
– Core category categories
– Changes in design as research went on
– Any problems
– Clear methodological decisions
– Feedback on findings
– Research journal

• Charmaz, 2006: Quality of theory
– Definitions of major categories
– Major categories raised to concepts
– Increased scope and depth of analysis
– Theoretical links between categories
– Increased understanding of phenomenon
– Theoretical implications of analysis
– Problems with which analysis closely aligned
– Implications of analysis

Creswell and Poth
• Key element: study of process, action, or interaction
• Coding: from data to theoretical model
• Presentation of theoretical model in a figure or diagram
• Story line connects categories
• Memoing throughout
• Reflexivity or self-disclosure

Ethnographic Research (1)
• Spindler & Spindler, 1987
– Observations contextualized
– Hypotheses emerge in situ
– Prolonged and repetitive observations
– Native view of reality
– Systematically elicited knowledge
– Instruments, codes, schedules generated in situ
– Transcultural, comparative perspective
– Implicit made explicit
– Interviewer not predetermine responses

Ethnographic Research (2)
Creswell and Poth
• Clear identification of culture-sharing group
• Specification of cultural theme
• Detailed description of cultural group
• Themes derive from understanding group
• Identification of field issues
• Explanation of how culture-sharing group works
• Self-disclosure and reflexivity of researcher

Case Study Research (1)
• Stake, 1995: Report Criteria
– Easy to read
– Each sentence contributes to whole
– Has conceptual structure
– Issues seriously developed
– Case adequately defined
– Sense of story
– Provides vicarious experience
– Quotations used effectively
– Headings, figures, and artifacts used effectively
– Edited well with polish

• Stake, 1995: Report Criteria
– Sound assertions
– Adequate attention to contexts
– Sufficient raw data
– Data sources will chosen
– Observations and interpretations triangulated
– Role of researcher apparent
– Intended audience apparent
– Shows empathy for all sides
– Personal intentions examined
– Individuals not at risk

• Yin (2014) characteristics of an exemplary
case study
– Significant
– Complete
– Consider alternative perspectives
– Displays sufficient evidence
– Composed in engaging manner

Creswell and Poth
• Clear identification case or cases
• Present a rationale for case selection
• Clear description of case
• Themes identified for case
• Assertions made from case analysis
• Researcher reflexive or self-disclosing about position

Comparing
the
Evaluation
Standards
28
Creswell, Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design
4e. SAGE Publishing, 2018.

LEAD 901 Chapter 10

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

Similaire à LEAD 901 Chapter 10

Similaire à LEAD 901 Chapter 10 (20)

Plus de BHUOnlineDepartment

Plus de BHUOnlineDepartment (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

LEAD 901 Chapter 10