Class 3 Notes - The Quality & Qualitative Research

Quality & Qualitative Research Key Features About meaning not numbers Doesn't provide a single answer Treats context as important Values subjectivity & reflexivity Can use all sorts of data (textual, non-textual) Good Qualitative Research? No criteria for judging good/bad qualitative research Distinguishing between good + bad qualitative research Is an interesting topic/research question necessary? Need implicit judgement but criteria is required? Still a huge debate a piece of IPA research Need criteria to help - IPA researchers can still judge a piece of IPA research Reliability (Braun & Clarke, 2013) Obtaining similar results when the same measure is administered to different participants by different researchers Objectivity, aim of generalizability Minimize influence of researcher, participants, context - a source of error, bias What would the problem of using reliability to assess qualitative research? Problems applying reliability to qualitative research Research inevitably influences the processes, subjectivity is key Interest in individual meanings/experiences, context is important Knowledge is produced in context/situated Rooted in post-positivist assumptions of single 'reality' Conclusion: Reliability as understood in quantitative research is NOT appropriate for judging the quality of qualitative research Epistemological Standpoint Naive Realism A fixed reality that can be assessed through research. Critical Realism A reality exists but we can never fully know it (underpins some qualitative work) Social Constructionism Reality is dependent on human interaction (underpins some qualitative work) Validity (Braun & Clarke, 2013) 4 forms of validity we claim to measure: Construct validity - measures what it claims to measure? Internal validity - effects caused by variables under study? External validity - can results be generalized to the wider population? Ecological validity - data collected meaningful to the "real world"? Conclusion: These are more applicable to quantitative research, BUT... Is interviews reflective of a person in their "real world"? Generalizability Can the results be generalized to a wider/different population? Quantitative Research: Interested in generalizable universal laws. Qualitative Research: Context, meaning, outcome, subjectivity, multiple truths. Conclusion: Generalizability, as understood in quantitative research, but won't always applicable to qualitative research. Transferability There would be little point in doing research if the results in 1 study had no relevance to any other situation (Yardley, 2008, p.238) Transferability - refers to the extent in which qualitative research can be "transferred" to other groups of PPI contexts. Key: To describe in specific detail, contexts, settings, participants - let the reader evaluate the potential transferability of the findings. However, NOT looking to statistically generalize our findings. Quality criteria for qualitative research Quality criteria & specific techniques Member checking Triangulation Disconfirming case analysis Paper trail Member Checking (Braun & Clarke, 2013) Triangulation (Braun & Clarke, 2013) Combining independent measures to provide 'accurate' reading Try + get closer to the truth? Problematic for most qualitative work as assumptions of multiple truths/realities Triangulation not abt accuracy, but strengthening claims, richer/fuller story Checklist Criteria for Qualitative Work (Yardley, 2000, 2001) Sensitivity to context Relevant literature Socio-cultural setting Participants' perspectives Commitment & rigour Thorough data collection + analysis In-depth engagement w/ the topic Coherence & transparency Clear argument Fit between theory & method Grounding in data Transparent account of data collection & analysis Reflexivity Theoretical Practical Socio-cultural Impact & importance Important Points Problems w/ interpretation, continually evolving No absolute criteria Depends on specific piece of research Judgement becomes more implicit w/ experience Always room for improvement Imp not to judge using quantitative criteria