Reading Golafshami and Wainwright for Crim 321ppt

8/3/2019 Reading Golafshami and Wainwright for Crim 321ppt

1/15

Understanding reliability

and validity in qualitativeresearchOct 11 class reading

Crim 321 (Kinney, Fall 2011)


2/15

Quant v. Qual

Tensions

Goals quant reliability, validity

Quality in qualitative research

trust, belief, coherence

Perhaps need for new language?


3/15

reliability?Credibility, trustworthiness

Neutrality or confirmability

Consistency or dependability

Applicability or transferability

Lincoln & Guba (1985: 290; see p 601 in

Golafshani 2003)


4/15

How to test or asses?

Triangulation is key for Golafshani

Mix methods (to move to similar senses of valuas quant generalizability)

Some warnings re: mixing methods though

Multiple realities can get trumped/lost/obscured(e.g., Barbour 1998)

Especially when constructivist paradigms areo eratin


5/15

Triangulation, reflexivity

Solutions to qualitative handlings of validity

Compare this reading with the conclusion of

Wainwright that reflexive practice is best


6/15

an sociological researce qualitative, critical anvalid?

crim321.fall2011.kinney


7/15

:

ualitative (SocScis) and general/academiccceptance

via improved ways of handling validity/reliability

researcher detachment

researched voice accepted as unquestioningly

valid/legit

ecent improvements, exposure, discussion of QU

ut:


8/15

w ...

y adjusting QUALs handling of validity-type iss

wider readership from more empirical, traditional

disciplines

e.g.: medical sociology, criminology, geograph

etc.

omething of the scepticism of positivistic and pos

ositivistic view of QUAL has dissipated


9/15

w ...

y morphing the handling of validity in qualitativerms into more social science based methods h

st the possibility for genuine CRITICAL work

o room for establishing rapport [as we need to be

istant, aloof]

o way to problematize our subjects discourse; it

ust be taken as is, an objective measure of a

henomena

ata as now particular occurrences, isolated from


10/15

u u

little bit of Hegel [dialectics, idealism]

little bit of Marx [dialectics, materialism]

ole of (social) consciousness, awareness

oments of awareness can yield conflict with

istorical givens, status quo,and thus the only

ossibility for change, even conciseness


11/15

reignmpiricism,(post-)positivism: enjoys a privilegediscourse

consensus (consciousness) accepts their moral

legitimacy

nlightenment, reason, rationality & empiricism;modernity

idealism now seen as dangerous spirituality or

even sophistry; a contra- discourse that is

ultimately destructive


12/15

y u

efinitions of valid research necessarily changes o

me

progress metaphors

standards, professionalisation, growth,accumulation of scientific understanding and

techniques

good science now, vs. 19-c, or even 1950s

if definition changes, validity is not truly objecti


13/15

w

methods of determining validity are in flux

o too are other methods: observation, collection,

lassification

erefore: we cannot objectively

easure/count/describe

all such attempts are situationally constructed

people in context likely are not conscious of

traditional pressures to conform and adopt statu

w


14/15

w

I cant count things, describe them and treat theseriously as found (cant take context for granted

I cant find (or worse, make) meaning via traditi

ethods and appeals to validity?

EFLEXIVE practice

do pure observation BUT add context, theory a

literature

the researchers self-awareness (topical, metho

y u u v


15/15

y u u v

p. 10-17 (last section) walks you through setting

nd doing a qualitative research project via reflexiractice

onsider this for your research review

nd of course, your own projects!

Documents

Reading Golafshami and Wainwright for Crim 321ppt