TRUSTWORTHINESS & INTEGRITY IN - You will not only interview the respondents once

but thrice to ensure that the response will be the

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
Lecturer: Marvie Joy Cabioc
Qualitative research is much more in terms of
methodology, it is just quite tricky when it comes to
clustering of the data.
Learnin objectives
By the end of the session, participants will be able to:
• Discuss the relevance Of trustworthiness in
qualitative evaluations
• Justify the choice Of qualitative approach to be
applied to a particular evaluation
• Develop a plan for establishing trustworthiness
in a qualitative component of an evaluation
Definition
- Words in research so that your readers will
know what you are trying to tell them, what you
are trying to portray and the message of your
research, especially in qualitative research we
have to define terms that are not familiar
VALIDITY
- "the state or quality of being sold, just, and well
founded" argued whether needed in qualitative
research
- A quality criterion referring to the degree to
which inferences made in a study are accurate
and well-founded; in measurement, the degree
to which an instrument measures what it is
intended to measure
- Meaning accurate, tama an research and tama
an responses, something that is not fabricated
FITTINGNESS
- Refers to the degree to which research findings
have meaning to others in similar situations.
- Later, they used the term transferability.
- Later on, they used the term auditability, a
concept that was later refined and called
dependability.
- For example, you are studying about the lived
experience of the nurses with meager pay either
in Indonesia or China, so different people but
using the same tool and questions. So, you can
transfer your tool, your methodology, your
research to other countries but would still have
the same results.
same.
EXPLICITNESS
- The ability to follow the researcher’s decisions
and interpretive efforts by means of carefully
maintained records and explicitly presented
results.
VIVIDNESS
- Involves the presentation of rich, vivid, faithful,
and artful descriptions and highlight salient
themes in data.
CREATIVITY
- Reflects challenges to traditional ways of
thinking, as demonstrated through innovative
approaches to collecting, analyzing, and
interpreting data.
THOROUGHNESS
- Refers to adequacy of the data as a result of
sound sampling and data collection decisions
(saturation), as well as the full development of
ideas.
CONGRUENCE
- Interconnectedness between methods and
question, between the current study and earlier
ones, and between the theory and approach;
also refers between study findings and contexts
outside the study situation.
SENSITIVITY
- Degree to which a research was done in a
manner that reflects respectful sensitivity to
and concern for the people, groups, and
communities being studied.

CRITICALITY
- Refers to the researchers’ critical appraisal to
every research decision.

INTEGRITY
- Demonstrated by ongoing self-reflection and
self-scrutiny to ensure that interpretations are
valid and grounded in the data. Criticality and
integrity are strongly interrelated and are
sometimes considered jointly.
GENERIC VS. SPECIFIC STANDARDS
- generic standards for all versus specific
standards for different types of inquiry
• argued that it depends on type of
qualitative tradition used
• some believe there are some general
criteria that are general to all of study
- There is a universal criteria in the naturalistic
paradigm. Whittemore and associates (2001)
proposed four primary criteria that they viewed
as essential to ALL qualitative.
- Watson and Girard (2004) proposed that quality
standards should be reflective of the research
method used. and that they must be with the
philosophical supporting the research tradition
endorsed."
- E.g. Grounded theory, phenomenology,
hermeneutics, ethnography, descriptive
qualitative research, and critical research have
standards for specific forms of qualitative
inquiry.
- There is a specific standard for a specific theory
TERMINOLOGY PROLIFERATION AND CONFUSION
- No common vocabulary for quality criteria in
qualitative research (ex. truth, value. integrity.)
- hundreds of criteria have been suggested
for evaluating quality of research
- Example, strategies are used to strengthen
integrity of qualitative research. "points of
departure" for considering A study is sufficiently
rigorous, trustworthy, insightful, or valid
LINCOLN AND GUBA'S FRAMEWORK OF QUALITY
CRITERIA
- Gold Standard for qualitative research
- Four criteria for developing trustworthiness:
o Credibility
o Dependability
o Confirmability
o Transferability
- (parallel positivist paradigm – internal validity,
reliability, objectivity, and external validity)
LINCOLN AND GUBA'S: CREDIBILITY
- Confidence in the truth value of the data and
interpretations of them
- Two aspects:
1. carrying out study in a way that enhances
the believability of the findings
2. taking steps to demonstrate credibility to
external readers
*Qualitative researchers must strive to establish
confidence in truth of findings for the and contexts in
the research.
LINCOLN AND GUBA'S: DEPENDABILITY
- stability (reliability) of data over time and over
conditions
- would the studv findings be repeated if
the inquiry were replicated with the same
(Or similar) participants in the same (or
similar) contest?
- MCST have dependability to have credibility. if
there is no credibility, then there is no
dependability, same as saying if it is not valid.
not reliable
LINCOLN AND GUBA'S: CONFIRMABILITY
- Refers to objectivity, that is, the potential for
congruence between two or more independent
people about the or meaning-seek to establish
that the data represents the information
participants provided (not by the inquirer)
- MUST reflect participants voice, not
bias/motivations/perspectives of the researcher
LINCOLN AND GUBA'S: TRANSFERABILITY
- "generalizability" – extent to which qualitative
findings can be transferred to or have
applicability in Other settings / groups
LINCOLN AND GUBA'S: AUTHENTICITY
- Extent to which researchers
fairly/faith/fully/show a range of different
realities
• emerges when it conveys the feeling
tone of participants voices as they are
lived (put yourself in their shoes)
- When a research is authentic, readers are
better able to understand the lives being
portrayed "in the round" (research) with some
sense of the mood, feeling, experience,
language, and context of those lives.
 - Understanding instead of judging
- You are representing a group of people
- For example, you are studying about women
who are victims of abuse or rape, the
interviewer must not be an abuse or rape victim
themselves because there will be a bias in terms
of the result.
- When we are representing people in our study
we should represent them well.
QUALITY-ENHANCEMENT: STRATEGIES DURING DATA
COLLECTION
- Strategies to increase reader's confidence in the
integrity of study results
1. prolonged engagement and persistent
observation
2. reflexivity strategies
3. data and method triangulation
4. comprehensive and vivid recording of
information
5. member checking
QUALITY-ENHANCEMENT: PROLONGED ENGAGEMENT
- The investment of SUFFICIENT TIME collecting
data to have an in-depth understanding Of the
language, or Of the people or group under
study
• testing for misinformation and distortions
• ensure SATURATION of important
categories
- provides SCOPE
QUALITY-ENHANCEMENT: PERSISTENT OBSERVATION
- concerns the salience of the data being
gathered -researcher's focus on characteristics
or aspects of a situation that are relevant to the
phenomena being studied
- provides DEPTH
QUALITY-ENHANCEMENT: REFLEXIVITY STRATEGIES
- involves awareness that the researcher as an
individual brings to the inquiry a unique
background, set of values, and a
social/professional identity that can affect the
research process
- ex. may use a journal/diary to maintain
reflexivity - make notes to record thoughts
about previous life experiences impact on
phenomenon of inquiry
QUALITY-ENHANCEMENT: STRATEGIES RELATING TO
CODING AND ANALYSIS
Investigator and Theory Triangulation
- Triangulation offers opportunities to sort out
“true” information from irrelevant or erroneous
information by using multiple methods and
perspectives.
- Investigator triangulation refers to the use of
two or more researchers to make data
collection, coding, and analytic decisions.
• The underlying premise is that through
collaboration, investigators can reduce
the possibility of biased decisions and
idiosyncratic interpretations of the data.
• Conceptually, investigator triangulation is
analogous to interrater reliability in
quantitative studies, and is a strategy that
is often used in coding qualitative data.
• One form of investigator triangulation is
called stepwise replication, a strategy
most often mentioned in connection with
Lincoln and Guba’s dependability
criterion. This technique involves having a
research team that can be divided into
two groups. These groups deal with data
sources separately and conduct,
essentially, independent inquiries through
which data can be compared.
- With theory triangulation, researchers use
competing theories or hypotheses in the
analysis and interpretation of their data.
- Theory triangulation can help researchers to
rule out rival hypotheses and to prevent
premature conceptualizations.
QUALITY-ENHANCEMENT: DATA AND METHOD
TRIANGULATION (OVERVIEW)
- use of multiple referents to draw conclusions
about what constitutes truth
- aim to overcome the intrinsic bias that comes
from a single-method/observer/ theory
- help capture a more complete picture of
phenomenon
DATA TRIANGULATION
- the use of multiple data sources for the purpose
of validating conclusions
- Three types:
1. time
2. person
3. space
Time Triangulation
- involves collecting data on the same
phenomenon or about the same people at
different points of time
- -similar to test-retest relativity assessment
 - do NOT want to see how it changes, but to
establish a CONGRUENCE of the phenomenon
over time
Space Triangulation
- involves collecting data on the same
phenomenon in multiple sites, to test for
consistency
Person Triangulation
- involves collecting data from different types or
level of people with the aim of validating data
through multiple perspectives on the
phenomenon.
METHOD TRIANGULATION
- Involves using multiple methods of data
collection about the same phenomenon.
- Multiple data collection methods provide an
opportunity to evaluate the extent to which a
consistent and coherent picture of the
phenomenon emerges.
DIFFERING SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT
How to assess quality
- Rigor and quality of qualitative data should be
measured according to the same standards as
quantitative data (Morse, et al.)
- Qualitative data should adhere to set standards
specifically designed for qualitative research
(Kvale, Lincoln, Guba)
- This should be assessed for each individual
study
ESTABLISHING QUALITY
Shaking up the establishment
- Kvale (1989) questioned the appropriateness of
the "holy trinity of science" used in quantitative
evaluation when applied to quantitative
evaluation.
• Reliability
• Validity
• Generalizability
- The paradigm behind qualitative evaluation
differs from quantitative evaluation. In
qualitative evaluation, we acknowledge
multiple constructed realities.
TRUSTWORTHINESS IS BORN
*Ekis na daw an internal validity, generalizability,
reliability ngan objectivity ha qualitative research kay
ginffollow na kuno naton ito nga new criteria hit
trustworthiness.
TRUSTWORTHINESS
How we have confidence in our findings
- To what extent can we place confidence in the
outcomes of the study?
- Do we believe what the evaluator has reported?
- Menu of options: CREDIBILITY
1. Prolonged engagement
- Multiple points of contact with the
participants
2. Referential adequacy
- Method used to store raw data in
records to examine later and
compare to other future studies to
show the credibility of data
3. Triangulation
- Using multiple data sources and
methods in an evaluation to
ensure the best possible
understanding
4. Peer debriefing
- Having colleagues review and
question your findings and
emergent hypotheses to see if
they seem reasonable and
plausible.
5. Negative case analysis
- Data that may indicate that there
are different patterns for different
groups of participants, or that
something is different in a certain
case.
6. Member checks
- Going back to the participant and
asking if they agree with the
findings or if there are other
explanations for the findings
- Menu of options: TRANSFERABILITY
1. Thick/rich descriptions
• Participants’ voices
• Context
• Methodology
- Menu of options: DEPENDABILITY AND
CONFIRMABILITY
1. Audit trail
• Raw data (notes, transcripts,
photos, etc.)
• Data reconstruction and synthesis
products (codebook)
• Process notes (memos and notes)
• Material relating to intentions and
dispositions (evaluation diaries and
reflexivity)
A note of caution...
You may come across other evaluators who adhere to a
different paradigm

- Critical of trustworthiness for shifting the

responsibility from the evaluators to the reader
to decide it the findings are worthy of trust
- Most strategies to ensure credibility,
transferability. dependability, and confirmability
happen in the analytic stage, instead of during
the evaluation design or data collection stages

More strategies
- Verification strategies for establishing reliability
and validity in qualitative research (Morse. et
al., 2002):
• Investigator responsiveness
• Methodological coherence
• Theoretical sampling and sampling
adequacy
• An active analytic stance
• Saturation

SUMMARY
- Rigorous qualitative research adheres to
standards of:
• Credibility—have we measured what we
set out to measure?
• Transferability—how applicable are our
results to other subjects and other
contexts?
• Dependability—would our findings be
repeated if our evaluation were replicated
in the same context with the same
subjects?
• Confirmability—to what extent are Our
findings affected by interests and biases?