Validity in Qualitative Research

Abstract

Much contemporary dialogue has centered on the difficulty of establishing validity criteria in qualitative research. Developing validity standards in qualitative research is challenging because of the necessity to incorporate rigor and subjectivity as well as creativity into the scientific process. This article explores the extant issues related to the science and art of qualitative research and proposes a synthesis of contemporary viewpoints. A distinction between primary and secondary validity criteria in qualitative research is made with credibility, authenticity, criticality, and integrity identified as primary validity criteria and explicitness, vividness, creativity, thoroughness, congruence, and sensitivity identified as secondary validity criteria.

The Influence of Telecentre Components on the Psychological Empowerment of Underserved Community Members in the Western Cape, South Africa

“…Internal validity focuses on ensuring that repetitive checks for data accuracy and bias in interpretation are maintained during analysis (Whittemore et al, 2001); whereas external validity focuses on the degree of generalisation established from a case study or data in question (Gray, 2009). To ensure the internal validity of this study, reflexivity where the researcher's biases and predispositions were noted to avoid influencing the research process and outcomes were also ensured.…”

Parental Experiences of Supporting Children with Clinically Significant Post-Traumatic Distress: a Qualitative Study of Families Accessing Psychological Services

“…Themes were reviewed for coherence through an examination of all coded text segments for each candidate theme, and consideration of whether themes accurately and distinctly reflect the meanings evident in the data (AttrideStirling 2001; Braun and Clarke 2006). To ensure the credibility of the analysis, reflective memos were written during data analysis by the primary researcher to keep a record early interpretations of the data and relationships between concepts (Birks et al 2008;Whittemore et al 2001). A reflexive journal was kept throughout data collection and analysis in an effort to recognize the influence of the researcher's prior experiences, thoughts, and assumptions and prevent premature or biased interpretations of the data (Mason 2002;Morrow 2005).…”

The focus group method: Insights from focus group interviews on sexual health with adolescents

“…However, in addition to their own accounts as a source of data, this facet of their sub-culture was sometimes acted out in the focus groups. Note how, in the extract below, the interview rolls out to reveal the way in which masculinity is regulated within peer groups: Data here raise the issue of considering the status of aspects of data in terms of validity, a fiercely debated concept (Hammersley, 1987;Sparkes, 2001;Whittemore et al, 2001;Aguinaldo, 2004). Amid the myriad of definitions of validity proposed by various scholars over the years (see Sparkes, 2001), accuracy appears to sum up the common thread throughout them all (Winter, 2000).…”