Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Research > Ch 17 - Trustworthiness and Integrity in Qualitative Research > Flashcards

Ch 17 - Trustworthiness and Integrity in Qualitative Research Flashcards

1
Q

Validity

A

“the state or quality of being sold, just, and well founded”

argued whether needed in qualitative research

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Generic vs. Specific Standards

A

generic standards for all versus specific standards for different types of inquiry

  • argued that it depends on type of qualitative tradition used
  • some believe there are some general criteria that are general to all types of study
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Terminology Proliferation and Confusion

A

No common vocabulary for quality criteria in qualitative research (ex. truth, value, integrity…)
-hundreds of criteria have been suggested for evaluating quality of research

–>strategies are used to strengthen integrity of qualitative research, “points of departure” for considering if a study is sufficiently rigorous, trustworthy, insightful, or valid

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Lincoln and Guba’s Framework of Quality Criteria

A

Gold Standard for qualitative research

Four criteria for developing trustworthiness: credibility, dependability, confirmability, and transferability
(parallel positivist paradigm - internal validity, reliability, objectivity, and external validity)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Lincoln and Guba’s: Credibility

A

confidence in the truth value of the data and interpretations of them

Two aspects:

  1. carrying out study in a way that enhances the believability of the findings
  2. taking steps to demonstrate credibility to external readers
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Lincoln and Guba’s: Dependability

A

stability (reliability) of data over time and over conditions
–>would the study findings be repeated if the inquiry were replicated with the same (or similar) participants in the same (or similar) context?

-MUST have dependability to have credibility

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Lincoln and Guba’s: Confirmability

A

refers to objectivity - the potential for congruence between two or more independent people about the data’s accuracy, relevance, or meaning

  • seek to establish that the data represents the information participants provided (not by inquirer)
  • ->MUST reflect participants voice, not bias/motivations/perspectives of the researcher
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Lincoln and Guba’s: Transferability

A

“generalizability” - extent to which qualitative findings can be transferred to or have applicability in other settings/groups

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Lincoln and Guba’s: Authenticity

A

extent to which researchers fairly/faithfully show a range of different realities
-emerges when it coveys the feeling tone of participants voices as they are lived (put yourself in their shoes)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Quality-Enhancement Strategies During DATA COLLECTION

A

–>strategies to increase reader’s confidence in the integrity of study results

  1. prolonged engagement and persistent observation
  2. reflexivity strategies
  3. data and method triangulation
  4. comprehensive and vivid recording of information
  5. member checking
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Quality-Enhancement: Prolonged Engagement

A
  • ->the investment of SUFFICIENT TIME collecting data to have an in-depth understanding of the culture, language, or views of the people or group under study
  • testing for misinformation and distortions
  • ensure SATURATION of important categories
  • ->provides SCOPE
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Quality-Enhancement: Persistent Observation

A

concerns the salience of the data being gathered

  • researcher’s focus on characteristics or aspects of a situation that are relevant to the phenomena being studies
  • ->provides DEPTH
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Quality-Enhancement: Reflexivity Strategies

A

involves awareness that the researcher as an individual brings to the inquiry a unique background, set of values, and a social/professional identity that can affect the research process
–>ex. may use a journal/diary to maintain reflexivity - make notes to record thoughts about previous life experiences impact on phenomenon of inquiry

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Quality-Enhancement: Data and Method Triangulation (overview)

A

use of multiple referents to draw conclusions about what constitutes truth

  • ->aim to overcome the intrinsic bias that comes from a single-method/observer/theory
  • help capture a more complete picture of phenomenon
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Data Triangulation

A 
the use of multiple data sources for the purpose of validating conclusions
Three types:
1. time
2. person
3. space
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Time Triangulation

A

involves collecting data on the same phenomenon or about the same people at different points of time

  • similar to test-retest relativity assessment
  • ->do NOT want to see how it changes, but to establish a CONGRUENCE of the phenomenon over time
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Space Triangulation

A

involves collecting data on the same phenomenon in multiple sites, to test for cross-site consistency

18
Q

Person Triangulation

A

involved collecting data from different types/levels of people with the aim of validating data through multiple perspectives on the phenomenon

19
Q

Method Triangulation

A

involves using multiple methods of data collection about the same phenomenon

  • ->ex. interviews, observations, documents
  • aim to evaluate extent to which a consistent/coherent picture of the phenomenon emerges
20
Q

Quality-Enhancement: Comprehensive/Vivid Recording of Information

A

Accurate recoding + field notes = enhanced description of study

  • thoroughness –> reader confidence in data
  • audit and decision trails
21
Q

Audit Trail

A

systematic collection of materials/documentation that would allow an independent auditor to come to conclusions about the data

  1. raw data (ex. interview transcripts)
  2. methodology, theoretic, and reflexive notes
  3. instrument development information (ex. pilot topic guides)
  4. data reconstruction products (ex. drafts of the final report)
22
Q

Decision trail

A

articulates the researcher’s decision rules for categorizing data and making analytic inferences
-useful way to enhance the DEPENDABILITY

23
Q

Quality-Enhancement: Member Checking

A

researchers give participants feedback about emerging interpretations and then obtain participants reactions
-participants should have an opportunity to assess/validate whether researcher’s interpretations are good interpretations (during or after data collection)

  • Controversial:
  • participants may “cover up” true feelings
  • participants may agree with researcher out of politeness or in belief that the researcher is “smarter”
24
Q

Strategies related to Coding and Analysis

A
  1. Investigator and Theory Triangulation
  2. Searching for Disconfirming Evidence and Competing Explanations
  3. Peer Review and Debriefing
  4. Inquiry Audits
25
Q

Coding and Analysis: Investigator Triangulation

A

–>the use of two or more researchers to make data collection, coding, and analytic decisions
-through collaboration, they can reduce bias and idiosyncratic interpretations
(analogous to interrater reliability in quantitative studies)

26
Q

Stepwise replication

A

connected to Lincoln and Guba’s dependability criterion

–>having a research team that can be divided into groups - deal with data sources separately and conduct independent inquiries through which data can be compared

27
Q

Coding and Analysis: Theory Triangulation

A
  • ->use competing theories/hypotheses in the analysis and interpretation of their data
  • help to rule out rival hypotheses to prevent premature conceptualizations
28
Q

Coding and Analysis: Searching for Disconfirming Evidence and Competing Explanations

A

–>systematic search of data that will challenge a categorization/explanation that has emerged early in the analysis

Disconfirming Evidence: occurs through purposive/theoretical sampling methods
-depends on concurrent data collection/analysis (cannot look for disconfirming data unless they have a sense of what the need to know)

Negative Case Analysis: researchers revise their interpretations by including cases that appear to disconfirm earlier hypotheses
–>GOAL: refine a hypotheses/theory until it accounts for all cases

29
Q

Coding and Analysis: Peer Review and Debriefing

A

external validation

  • ->involves sessions with peers to review/explore aspects of the inquiry
  • exposes researchers to the searching questions of others who are experience in either the methods of constructivist inquiry, the phenomenon being studied, or both

–>is there evidence of researcher bias? do the gathered data accurately portray the phenomenon? themes? etc

30
Q

Coding and Analysis: Inquiry Audits

A

a procedure that is a means of enhancing a study’s dependability and confirmability
–>a scrutiny of the data and relevant supporting documents (audit trail) by an external reviewer

31
Q

Strategies related to Presentation

A
  1. Thick and Contextualized Description

2. Researcher Credibility

32
Q

Presentation: Thick and Contextualized Description

A

Thick Description: a rick, thorough, and vivid description of the research context, the participants, and the experiences/processes observed during the inquiry

  • no transferability unless sufficient data is gathered
  • researchers should avoid sharing only the most dramatic/sensational stories (avoid misrepresentations)
33
Q

lachrymal validity

A

a criterion for evaluating research according to the extent to which the report can wring tears from it’s readers

34
Q

bloodless findings

A

characterized by a tendency of some researchers to “play in safe” in writing up the research
-reporting the obvious without any indicative analytic spin to the sequence, structure, or form of the findings

35
Q

Presentation: Researcher Credibility

A

researchers are the data collecting instruments so they must have proper qualifications, experience, and reflexivity
-trustworthiness is enhanced when information about the researcher’s credentials are included

36
Q

Incubation

A

process of living the data
–>a process in which researchers must try to understand their meaning, find their essential patterns, and draw well-grounded/insightful conclusions

37
Q

CREDIBILITY of Qualitative Research

A

Are the results believable?

  • readers only see what the researchers publish, so researchers must make sure to corroborate finding through peer debriefings, member checks, audits, triangulation, and negative case analysis - also portray honesty with limitations
  • researchers seek to persuade readers about their conceptualization
38
Q

MEANING of Qualitative Results

A

Flows directly from qualitative analysis

  • analysis and interpretation occur simultaneously
  • peer and outside reviews
  • explore possible alternative explanations for their findings, limitations, etc
39
Q

IMPORTANCE of Qualitative Results

A
  • ->especially productive for explaining poorly understood phenomena - must merit scrutiny
  • must determine if it is worth studying or if it can be solved by common knowledge –>insightful? “aha” moment?
40
Q

IMPLICATIONS of Qualitative Results

A
  1. Implications for further research?
  2. Implications for nursing practice?
  3. Implications for nursing theories?

Research (10 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions