kwaliteit onderzoek Flashcards
credibiliteit
in staat om de complexiteit van de WH te vatten en om om te gaan met dat wat zich niet makkelijk laat uitleggen/verklaren?
is directly related to research design and
the researcher’s instruments and data.
meaningful inferences from instruments that measure what they intend to
measure
recursive research design process
methods en findings afhankelijk van elkaar
Transfereerbaarheid
Kunnen inzichten toegepast/getransfereerd worden naar andere settings (zonder daarom in te boeten in contextspecifieke rijkheid)?
transferability is the way in which qualitative
studies can be applicable, or transferable, to broader contexts while still maintaining their context-specific richness.
“How can one
determine the degree to which the findings of an inquiry may have applicability in other contexts or with other respondents?
Methods : detailed descriptions of the data themselves as well the context (also called thick description) so that readers/research audiences can make comparisons to other contexts based on as much information as
possible
Betrouwbaarheid (“Dependability”
Is je studie congruent en in staat een antwoord te geven op je onderzoeksvraag?
stability of the data
reasoned argument for how you are
collecting the data, and the data are consistent with your argument.
methods :
-triangulation and sequencing of methods
-creating a well-articulated rationale for these choices to
confirm that you have created the appropriate data collection plan given your research questions
Confirmeerbaarheid:
Kunnen mijn bevindingen bevestigd worden (of zijn ze gebaseerd op bias, vooroordelen, foute interpretaties)?
acknowledge and explore the ways that our biases and prejudices map onto our interpretations of data
-> mediate those to the fullest extent
possible through structured reflexivity processes
triangulation strategies, researcher reflexivity
processes, and external audits
types validiteit: Descriptieve validiteit
emic en etic
Zijn mijn data factueel accuraat?
recording and transcribing of interviews (e.g., Who recorded interview transcripts? Who transcribed them? Are there errors or omissions?) and the
taking of fieldnotes
the inseparability of methods and
findings,” > it is extremely important that your data are accurate
Interpretatieve validiteit
emic
Is er een match tussen geattribueerde betekenis & actuele ervaring?
accuracy of your analysis vis-à-vis the lived experience of the participants in your study.
Methods for achieving this are closely related to
data collection and analysis
VB: how you interpret someone in
the moment of an interview
aspect of interpretive validity.
decisions made during data collection, interpretive validity is affected by how you analyze
the entire corpus of data.
Methods :
use the words and concepts of the people studied; this is referred to as emic accounts in qualitative research.
The contrasting concept is etic, which entails that the language used to describe an account is not organic to the participants, meaning that it is introduced by
the researcher
Theoretische validiteit:
Geeft mijn studie een afdoend inzicht in de bestudeerde fenomenen (incl. basisconcepten & relaties daartussen)? Is mijn studie geïnformeerd door (en bijdragend aan) de theoretische kennisbasis?
Theoretical validity is about the ability to have your data speak to existing theory and/or to have existing theories inform your data.
Methods
for achieving theoretical validity include ensuring that an applicable theory is provided and that it explains the data.
Evaluatieve validiteit:
Slaag ik er in om niet te evalueren/oordelen over mensen en/of hun situaties?
Is whether the researcher is able to describe and
understand data without being evaluative or judgmental.
Evaluative validity, like generalizability, is not as central to qualitative research as descriptive, interpretive, and theoretical validity because many qualitative
researchers do not attempt to evaluate what we are studying
Generaliseerbaarheid)
not a goal … but
This entails determining how individuals from the
same community agree and understand their experiences.
This does not mean that researchers are looking to generalize but rather ask questions about people’s experiences vis-à-vis each other’s experiences
wat zijn de strategieen voor validiteit?
Triangulatie > verschillende perspectieven
It is commonly thought of as having different sources
or methods challenge and/or confirm a point or set of interpretations. Broadly, triangulation involves “taking different perspectives” ZIE PAGINA 269
Validering door participanten (aka “member checks”) >We prefer the term participant validation since
it connotes what we describe here as a more process-oriented and personcentered approach to challenging interpretations by creating the conditions
for study participants to speak into and about a study
Strategisch sequentiëren van methodes >
Thus, sequencing is about building the complexity of a study through a strategic collection of data
Thick description > rijke gedetailleerde beschrijvingen
Dialogic engagement > it is very important that you think about and strategically design encounters in which you will have your research and your thinking truly challenged.
Multiple coding > H. 8 The goal of this
process is to see how people are coding the data, specifically looking to see if interpretations overlap, intersect, and/or are divergent and in what
ways.
Gestructureerde reflexiviteit >Systematically and critically
engaging with our biases, interpretations, processes, and reflections can help us to produce more complex and ethical research
(Mixed methods) > which strategically combine aspects of
qualitative and quantitative methods, can be an additional way to seek qualitative rigor and validity depending on the research questions, goals, and arguments you are trying to make
validity in research in QR
Validity is an active methodological process, a central value of qualitative research and a research goal.
Validity needs to be attended to from the research design phase through data collection to analysis and writing up
your finding
Validity, in qualitative research, refers to the ways that researchers can affirm that their findings are faithful to participants’ experiences. Put another way, validity refers to the quality and rigor of a study.
transactional validity
techniques and attempts to
achieve a “higher level of accuracy and consensus by means of revisiting facts, feelings, experiences, and values or beliefs collected and interpreted”
transformational validity
emancipatory process leading toward social change”
that “involves a deeper, self-reflective, empathetic
understanding of the researcher while working with the researched
meaning validity
Validity is an approach to achieving complexity through systematic ways of implementing and assessing a study’s rigor.
qualitative research demonstrates a fidelity to participants’ experiences rather than specific methods
Thick description
1 aspect in increasing the complexity of your research by thoroughly and clearly describing the study’s context, participants, and related experiences so
as to produce complex interpretations and findings that allow audiences to make more contextualized meaning of your research.
2 Thick
description connotes a depth of contextual detail, usually garnered through multiple data sources, including observation and fieldnotes; it allows readers to have enough information and a depth of context so
that they can picture the setting in their minds and form their own opinions about the quality of your research and your interpretations.
