RESEARCH METHODS TABLES exam 2
Criteria for qualitative research
Rigor criteria for positivist/realist research
Internal validity Is the relationship really causal?
External validity Can the research be applied to other
contexts?
Reliability Is the inquiry consistent? Stable?
Replicable?
Objectivity Is the research free of bias/values?
Parallel criteria for interpretive/realist research (Guba and Lincoln)
Parallel to How to
Credibility Internal validity Understand if the relationship is really causal
1. Prolonged engagement
2. Persistent observation
3. Peer debriefing
4. Negative case analysis
5. Progressive subjectivity
6. Member checks
Transferability External Transfer findings to other context
validity - Thick description of findings
Dependability Reliability Concerned with stability of data overtime
- Process audit= outsiders can explore the
process and come to the same conclusions
Confirmability Objectivity must assure that data/interpretations/outcomes are
not only in the researcher’s mind
- Through audit of relationship between data
and outcomes by outside reviewers
Table to explain the 6 criteria of credibility
Prolonged engagement Involvement at the site of the To overcome the effects of misinformation
inquiry and distortion, and to establish a
relationship to uncover constructions
Persistent observation Long observation To identify elements and characteristics
and add depth to the research
Peer debriefing Engaging with a disinterested To test out findings
peer in discussions
Negative case analysis Revising working hypothesis To develop and refine given hypotheses
Progressive subjectivity Monitoring the evaluator own To record the development of the
developing construction constructions
Member checks Testing hypotheses with To check with the members of the research
members of the stakeholding themselves
groups
, Reflexivity criteria
Methodological Researcher makes methodological choices and acknowledges that they are not
neutral tools
a. Data are produced, not collected
Self-reflexivity - Identity= the research epistemological position influence the understanding
concepts
- Motivations= interests/values/political commitments brought to the research
- Positionality= how does my identity affect the research process
- Power= what is the power relationship between researcher and researched
- Voice= who speaks for whom? Who has a voice in the case that certain groups
do not have one?
INTERVIEWS AND FOCUS GROUP, LECTURE 13
Unobtrusive data collection Data existed independently of the researcher. It
is not affected by the researcher presence
Obtrusive data collection Allow the study of unobservable phenomenon=
mental construction.
- Researcher presence affect the
interaction and the data construction
Data is produced
Comparing form of obtrusive data collection
Strength Weakness
Interviews - Understanding personal interpretations - Ecological validity= what people say is not
- Study unobservable phenomenon always what they actually do
- Time and cost efficient - Methodological individualism= individual
taken as the unit that matters
Participant - Studying social interactions - Very time consuming
observation - Understand what people actually do - Limited to what can be observed
- Ecological validity= natural setting - Low external validity
Focus group - Studying social interactions and the - Difficult to organize and analyze
(discussions social construction of meaning - Artificial setting
among 6/10 - Rich data - Low external validity
strangers) - Sensitive topics (debate)
Experiments - Isolating and measuring causal effects - Ecological validity
- Studying unconscious behavior - No room for meaning, interpretation
- No flexibility
Surveys - Generalizability to broader population - Ecological validity
- Realiability - Metholodigcal individualism
- Control variables - Expensive
- No flexibility
Criteria for qualitative research
Rigor criteria for positivist/realist research
Internal validity Is the relationship really causal?
External validity Can the research be applied to other
contexts?
Reliability Is the inquiry consistent? Stable?
Replicable?
Objectivity Is the research free of bias/values?
Parallel criteria for interpretive/realist research (Guba and Lincoln)
Parallel to How to
Credibility Internal validity Understand if the relationship is really causal
1. Prolonged engagement
2. Persistent observation
3. Peer debriefing
4. Negative case analysis
5. Progressive subjectivity
6. Member checks
Transferability External Transfer findings to other context
validity - Thick description of findings
Dependability Reliability Concerned with stability of data overtime
- Process audit= outsiders can explore the
process and come to the same conclusions
Confirmability Objectivity must assure that data/interpretations/outcomes are
not only in the researcher’s mind
- Through audit of relationship between data
and outcomes by outside reviewers
Table to explain the 6 criteria of credibility
Prolonged engagement Involvement at the site of the To overcome the effects of misinformation
inquiry and distortion, and to establish a
relationship to uncover constructions
Persistent observation Long observation To identify elements and characteristics
and add depth to the research
Peer debriefing Engaging with a disinterested To test out findings
peer in discussions
Negative case analysis Revising working hypothesis To develop and refine given hypotheses
Progressive subjectivity Monitoring the evaluator own To record the development of the
developing construction constructions
Member checks Testing hypotheses with To check with the members of the research
members of the stakeholding themselves
groups
, Reflexivity criteria
Methodological Researcher makes methodological choices and acknowledges that they are not
neutral tools
a. Data are produced, not collected
Self-reflexivity - Identity= the research epistemological position influence the understanding
concepts
- Motivations= interests/values/political commitments brought to the research
- Positionality= how does my identity affect the research process
- Power= what is the power relationship between researcher and researched
- Voice= who speaks for whom? Who has a voice in the case that certain groups
do not have one?
INTERVIEWS AND FOCUS GROUP, LECTURE 13
Unobtrusive data collection Data existed independently of the researcher. It
is not affected by the researcher presence
Obtrusive data collection Allow the study of unobservable phenomenon=
mental construction.
- Researcher presence affect the
interaction and the data construction
Data is produced
Comparing form of obtrusive data collection
Strength Weakness
Interviews - Understanding personal interpretations - Ecological validity= what people say is not
- Study unobservable phenomenon always what they actually do
- Time and cost efficient - Methodological individualism= individual
taken as the unit that matters
Participant - Studying social interactions - Very time consuming
observation - Understand what people actually do - Limited to what can be observed
- Ecological validity= natural setting - Low external validity
Focus group - Studying social interactions and the - Difficult to organize and analyze
(discussions social construction of meaning - Artificial setting
among 6/10 - Rich data - Low external validity
strangers) - Sensitive topics (debate)
Experiments - Isolating and measuring causal effects - Ecological validity
- Studying unconscious behavior - No room for meaning, interpretation
- No flexibility
Surveys - Generalizability to broader population - Ecological validity
- Realiability - Metholodigcal individualism
- Control variables - Expensive
- No flexibility
