Studied by 0 people
Looks like no one added any tags here yet for you.
Can we use the same approaches we use to evaluate quantitative research to determine whether qualitative research is appropriate?
No, in qualitative we have no measures or instruments to assess (no construct or internal validity), and no intervention or treatment to examine for threats to internal validity
Rigour and validation
Synonymous with trustworthiness
Qualitative Evaluation Approaches
Trustworthiness, methodological coherence, consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research, relativistic approach to characterizing traits, and ethics
Trustworthiness
convincing an audience that a study is worth paying attention to and worth taking account of (merit of the study)
Four Aspects of Trustworthiness
Truth Value, applicability, consistency, and neutrality
Truth Value
Credibility of a study, confidence in the “truth” of study findings for participants (how does it reflect their experiences and meaning)
Applicability
Transferability of a study, forming understandings that may be relevant to other contexts or participants
Consistency
dependability of a study, would similar findings emerge if a study were replicated in similar circumstances
What aspects of trustworthiness seeks to understand variability of study findings or unique experiences that stem from the multiple realities assumption
Consistency
Neutrality
findings are based on participants’ meanings and experiences, there is researcher reflexivity, and the findings are not a mere function of researchers’ biases, interests, and perspectives
Researcher Reflexivity
A researcher’s positionality, reflect on biases, experiences, and backgrounds to consider how to shape research
What is the starting place when evaluating qualitative research?
Trustworthiness
How many strategies are available to enhance trustworthiness, rigour, and validation?
9 strategies, that target different or multiple phases of the research study
Strategies to enhance trustworthiness, rigour, and validation
audit trail, member check, peer debrief, present negative or discrepant information, prolonged engagement, purposeful sampling, researcher reflexivity, triangulation, and rich, thick description
Audit Trail
Researchers maintain detailed descriptions of the entire research process, someone external to the study examines various components of the study, the events, influences, and actions are all recorded
Detailed recollection of their analytic process, including transcribing of interviews, reading and coding the data, and developing categories and themes
Audit Trail
True or False: the audit trail is more difficult to incorporate because it requires more timing and thinking
True
Member Check
the participants of the study review the data and/or study themes and findings, they are then given the opportunity to add, alter, or delete information
Which strategy is very easy to implement and increases accuracy of the data?
Member Check
Peer Debrief
Researchers pushed by professional “peer” to critically reflect on the study, they discuss and debate the themes generated
Present Negative or Discrepant Information
presenting information that counters the main study findings and highlights opposing views and unique experiences
Prolonged Engagement
very important in ethnography, sustained time spent with participants in the field, and it enhances the quality of the research
Purposeful Sampling
recruiting information-rich participants who can best inform research questions
Reflexivity
Reflecting on one’s experiences with the phenomenon being explored; and considering how one’s experiences shape the research process
Rich, thick descriptions
-generating thorough descriptive data
-presenting findings in a rich manner
-use quotes to bring participants’ voices forward
-ask probing, open-ended questions
Triangulation
-crosscheck study findings and interpretations
-use a variety of data sources, perspectives, and methods
True or False: a certain number of strategies does not guarantee a strong study
True
Coherence
alignment between various components of a research study, between the researchers’ philosophical assumptions, research questions, study design, methods of data generation, data analysis, and interpretation
What is deemed to be reflective of strong research?
crosschecking study with comprehensive “checklist” of criteria
Methodological Coherence
-indicator of quality research
-requires alignment within a research design
-coherence among philosophical assumptions, research questions, study design, data generation, data analysis, and interpretation
-researchers need to critically think about, and carefully plan, their qualitative study
What evaluation approach uses the armchair walkthrough method?
Methodological Coherence
Plan all aspects of your study and reflect on what you’re doing and what changes you may need to make
Armchair Walkthrough
Armchair Walkthrough
-reflect on all aspects of the qualitative study
-consider alternative approaches
-provides a road map
COREQ
Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research
Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research
a comprehensive protocol to assess qualitative research, three categories with a total of 32 items
Who developed the COREQ?
Tong, Sainsbury, and Craig (2007)
Three categories of the COREQ
Research team and reflexivity, study design, and analysis and findings
Purposes of the COREQ
-a guide to inform researchers of important aspects to include in their research (can add transparency when reporting qualitative research)
-identifies a variety of details that qualitative research can be evaluated on
Taking a Relativistic Approach to Evaluating Research
-no one-size-fits-all approach
-qualitative research can include a variety of methods and generate various types of data
-not a pre-determined set of criteria
-it is up to researchers (and the research audience) to evaluate and determine the merits of a study
Who introduced the relativistic approach to evaluating qualitative research?
Andrew Sparkes, Brett Smith, and colleagues
Who often uses the relativistic approach for evaluating qualitative research?
Experts in the field
Characterizing traits
Criteria that may allude to the quality of research, fluid and dynamic, the context of the study is very important, and what is deemed to be of high quality in one study may not be of high quality in another study
Ethics
Should be the foundation of all research in kinesiology, should be ongoing within the research process, and researchers need to ensure respect for the peoples, concern for welfare, and equity
What is integral to the way researchers think about, approach, and do their research?
Ethics
