Measuring Quality in Qualitative Research

7/28/2019 Measuring Quality in Qualitative Research

1/13

Measuring the Quality of

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Seale, C. (1999). Quality in qualitative research. QualitativeInquiry, 5(4), 465-478.

Thurmond, V. A. (2001). The point of triangulation. Journal of NursingScholarship, 33(3), 253-258.

Presented by

Dr Ponnam Abhilash


2/13

Modernism and Post

ModernismModernism: A tendency to favor

rational thought over metaphysical,

theological explanations

Post Modernism:A tendency in favor

of rejection of objective truths and

formulation of grand theories


3/13

Assessing quality within positivist

(modern) paradigm

Quality of findings CRITERIOLOGY

Validity : Whether what we are measuring equalswhat we intend to measure?

Reliability: Is the measurement accurate?

Evaluating the quality of research reports

Truth value Applicability

Consistency

Neutrality


4/13

Problems in embracing positivist criteria

to assess qualitative (post modern)

research quality

TRUTH VALUE (accuracy)

Positivism Exploration of single objective reality exists

Interpretivism

Exploration of multiple subjective realities thatare constructed within the minds of humanbeings


5/13

Generalizability (f rom sample to popu lat ion)

Positivism:

Promotes development ofgrandtheories

Interpretivism:

Promotes development ofsubstant ivetheoriesapplicable only to the local contexts

Consistency (lack o f con tradic t ion with otheraccepted princ iples/ theories)

Positivism:

Assumes linear causality

Interpretivism:

Multiple and subconscious reasons for causalitywhich cannot be explicitly elaborated


6/13

Neutrality (Unbiasedness)

Positivism: Artificial separation of personal values from

inquiry is possible because researcher is not thepart of methodology

Interpretivism:

Separation not possible because researchertakes active role in data collection and dataanalysis


7/13

Lincoln and Gubas (1985)

Suggestions

Truth value member checks (informantfeed backs)

Generalization

transferability Neutrality auditing (self auditing- self

critical account on research process)

Consistency dependability (peer

auditing)

Authenticity (L & G,1994) fairness(representation of range of realities)


8/13

Triangulation

To use two or more aspects of research

to strengthen the design

to increase the validity of findings

(Campbell & Fiske,

1959)

by

Cancelling out the biases arising from

choosing one aspect over others

(Seale,

1999)


9/13

Different kinds of triangulation

(Thurmond, 2001)

Data Source Triangulation:Variance in events, situations, times, places, and

persons add to the study because of the possibilityof revealing atypical data or the potential of

identifying similar patterns, thus increasing

confidence in the findings (Fielding & Fielding,

1986).


10/13

Investigator Triangulation:Confirmation of data among investigators, withoutprior discussion or collaboration with one another,lends greater credibility to the observations

(Denzin, 1970).

Methodological Triangulation: By using multiple methods, the researcher strives

to decrease the deficiencies and biases that stemfrom any single method (Mitchell, 1986, p. 19)creating the potential for counterbalancing theflaws or the weaknesses of one method with thestrengths of another (p. 21).


11/13

Theoretical Triangulation:Theoretical triangulation is the use of multiple

theories or hypotheses when examining a

phenomenon (Denzin, 1970)

Data-Analysis Triangulation:Data-analysis triangulation is the combination of

two or more methods of analyzing data.


12/13

Conclusions

Enhances the completeness andconfirmation of data in research

findings of qualitative research.

Lends to use of both quantitative and

qualitative strategies in the same

study as a viable option to obtaincomplementary findings and to

strengthen research results.


13/13

Thank you!

Documents

Measuring Quality in Qualitative Research