|
TERM |
DEFINITION |
EXAMPLES |
| Credibility | Credibility in qualitative research refers to the extent to which a research study is believable. A researcher must link a study’s findings with reality to demonstrate that the findings are true. Credibility is about establishing whether the findings are representative and interpretative of participants’ original data (Kortsjens & Moser, 2018) |
Member-Checking where the researcher shares research findings, data, and conclusions with the participants Triangulation of sources, methods, data, and findings. Audit trails to allow other researchers to check and authenticate data analysis. Peer reviews. Persistent observation. |
| Dependability | Dependability refers to the stability of the research findings over time in that they are consistent and repeatable. In this case, the data that has been provided by the participants can support the evaluation, interpretation, and recommendations of the study (Forero et al., 2018). |
Inquiry audit by an outside researcher(s) Stepwise replication where data and findings are compared. |
| Confirmability | The extent to which other researchers could confirm the authenticity of the study findings. Confirmability is about establishing whether the findings are derived from the data or they are representative of the researcher’s imagination and thoughts(Kortsjens & Moser, 2018). | Audit trail where the researcher describes all the research steps taken from the development of reporting of research findings. These steps help to establish whether the researcher adhered to research ethics and whether the study was effective. |
| Transferability | This is the extent to which findings could be replicated to other settings, situations, populations, times or contexts with different respondents. | Thick description allows qualitative researchers to provide a detailed account of data collection experiences and make cultural and social connections. In such a case, readers and outside researchers can make transferability judgments(Kortsjens & Moser, 2018). |
| Generalizability | The ability to extend or apply research findings and conclusions drawn from a sample population onto a large proportion with similar results. | Smith (2018) establishes that evaluating generalizability requires rich interpretations of the research as well as thick descriptions to establish what is different or similar in their situations. Leung (2015) asserts that generalizability could be evaluated using systematic sampling, constant comparison, triangulation, multidimensional theory, proper audit, and documentation. |
| Internal validity | This is the extent to which a study demonstrates a cause-effect relationship between an intervention and an outcome. A study could be capable of eliminating alternatives until it comes up explanations for the findings (Cucnic, 2020) |
Triangulation of methods, data, and findings. Validation of findings by respondents. Experimental manipulation of variables to examine relationships. Checking out if there are other explanations for the research findings. |
| External validity | The extent to which the findings of a particular study could be applied to other contexts or settings. It answers the question of whether the findings apply to other settings, people, situations, or times (Cucnic, 2020). | Replication of the study in different settings and with different samples. Leung (2015) establishes that external validity is evaluated through systematic sampling, constant comparison, triangulation, multidimensional theory, and proper audit and documentation |
References
Cucnic, A. (2020, January 26). Understanding internal and external validity. Very well Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/internal-and-external-validity-4584479
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Forero, R., Nahidi, S., De Costa, J., Mohsin, M., Fitzgerald, G., Gibson, N., McCarthy, S., & Aboagye-Sarfo, P. (2018). Application of four-dimension criteria to assess the rigor of qualitative research in emergency medicine. BMC Health Services Research, 18(1), 120. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-2915-2
Irene Korstjens & Albine Moser (2018) Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4: Trustworthiness and publishing. European Journal of General Practice , 24(1), 120-124. 10.1080/13814788.2017.1375092
Leung L. (2015). Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, 4(3), 324–327. https://doi.org/10.4103/2249-4863.161306
Smith, B. (2018) Generalizability in qualitative research: misunderstandings, opportunities, and recommendations for the sport and exercise sciences, Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 10(1), 137-149. 10.1080/2159676X.2017.1393221
