amazinghas.blogg.se - Concept of validity and reliability

#CONCEPT OF VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY VERIFICATION#

Qualitative Health Research, 11, 522–537.

#CONCEPT OF VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY VERIFICATION#

They believe that validation is used to emphasize a process, instead of verification made by extensive time spent in the field, detailed description, and a close relationship between the researcher and the participants. This indicate that any report of research is a representation by the author. The secondary criteria are related to explicitness, vividness, creativity, thoroughness, congruence, and sensitivity.Īccording to Creswell & Poth (2013) they consider “validation” in qualitative research as it is trying to assess the “accuracy” of the results, as best described by the researcher, the participants, and the readers.

Integrity (Are the investigators self-critical?).

Criticality (Is there a critical appraisal of all aspects of the research?).

Authenticity (Are different voices heard?).

Credibility (Are the results an accurate interpretation of the participants’ meaning?).

They classified these criteria into primary and secondary criteria. Whittemore, Chase, and Mandle (2001), analyzed 13 writings about validation and came up with key validation criteria from these studies. According to Lather (1991) he identified four types of validation (triangulation, construct validation, face validation, and catalytic validation) as a “reconceptualization of validation.” In structural corroboration, the scientist uses several sources of data to support or deny the interpretation. Instead of using the word validation, Eisner (1991) constructed standards such as structural corroboration, consensual validation, and referential adequacy as evidence for asserting the credibility of qualitative research. In qualitative research, researchers look for dependability that the results will be subject to change and instability rather than looking for reliability.

To confirm that the results are transferable between the researcher and those being studied, thick description is needed. To operationalize these terms, long engagement in the field and the triangulation of data sources, methods, and investigators to establish credibility. Trustworthiness is achieved by credibility, authenticity, transferability, dependability, and confirmability in qualitative research. Lincoln and Guba (1985) used “trustworthiness” of a study as the naturalist’s equivalent for internal validation, external validation, reliability, and objectivity. However, validity in qualitative research might have different terms than in quantitative research. It can be enhanced by detailed field notes by using recording devices and by transcribing the digital files. In the process of explaining or predicting the phenomena and/or processes of health care, researchers and clinicians must be able to evaluate the truthfulness, precision, and dependability of the instruments and measurement methods used to generate the knowledge for evidence-based practice.Reliability in qualitative research refers to the stability of responses to multiple coders of data sets. The different dimensions of validity and reliability are briefly discussed and a concept map is used to illustrate their relationships.

Validity (similar to reliability) is a relative concept validity is not. It is not intended to replace the essential, detailed discussions found in numerous textbooks and journal articles. Validity is the main extent to which a concept, conclusion or measurement is well-founded. It is intended to serve as a succinct, practical reminder of the definitions and relationships of the concepts of validity and reliability. The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive overview of measurement error as it applies to research design and instrumentation issues. It may be more difficult, however, to understand and evaluate a study’s measurement error, or the reliability (trustworthiness) and validity (truth) of its methods and measurement strategies, in part because the extensive body of literature associated with validity and reliability can be overwhelming. One of the difficulties in their decision-making, however, is answering the fundamental question, “How do I evaluate the relevance and applicability of the findings?” There are a number of factors involved in such an evaluation and, frequently, readers can easily determine the usefulness of a study’s findings based on similarities to their own clinical setting, timeframe, and/or patient population. Clinicians increasingly desire evidence upon which to base their practice decisions.