Brown et al evaluate Flashcards
Evaluate in terms of reliability.
The study was reliable, easy to replicate the process in a standardised way because there was satisfactory inter-rater reliability between the interviews and the use of semi-structured interviews allowed for replication.
Evaluate in terms of application to real life.
The findings of the research may be used to implement support for vulnerable women exposed to the risk factors identified. Eg, recognition of the role of social factors meant the introduction of support structures as a strategy for treatment or prevention came to the fore and is now widely promoted.
Evaluate in terms of validity.
The data was likely to be valid because it was gathered by trained and experienced interviews using a semi-structure interview technique, allowing detailed information to be gathered. The combination of qualitative and quantitative data increases the validity.
Evaluate in terms of causality.
Causality may not be established because there are many subjective variable involved in the onset of depression. Eg, the life events during the 12 months between the two interviews could not be objectively assessed, making the link between events and depression harder to link causally.
Evaluate in terms of generalisability.
As the sample was very precise (working class mother with at least one child still at home) the findings are therefore very precise and generalising to all women may not be possible.
Evaluate in terms of sampling.
Random sampling meant that all the women had an equal chance of being chosen, which removed the source of bias. However, the inevitable attrition over a longitudinal study may have created bias in the sample as only some types on participant may have dropped.
