The concept of validity is explained by a variety of terms in qualitative studies. This concept isn’t a single, fixed or universal concept. Despite the fact that a few qualitative researchers have debated that the term validity is not relevant to qualitative research, but at the same time, they have realized the need for some type of qualifying check or measure for their research. Maxwell identified five threats to validity in qualitative research.
Descriptive validity: What a person is unable to record while gathering data often is as significant as what is collected. Research workers should record interviews accurately and completely. The investigator should make sure that the words and phrases documented are those of the person being observed and not a shorter form recorded by the observer. Tape and video recordings of interviews can help verify descriptive data but won’t be able to eliminate all of the threats. The investigator should describe the environment and actions outside the lens of video camera to guarantee all the causes of “what happened” could be captured and examined.
Interpretation validity: To effectively interpret what has happened, the investigator will have to capture the observation as interpreted by the individual being researched. The primary threat to valid interpretation is imposing one’s own meaning, instead of understanding the viewpoint of the individuals studied and the meanings they attach to their words, phrases and actions. In order to avoid compromising interpretation validity, investigators should use open-ended questions which allow the participant to elaborate on answers. Inquiries should not be confusing or directional in an effort to obtain any response other than the one the respondent would have normally given.
Researcher bias: Each and every investigator will have some kind of bias. The bias need not be racial, ethnical, gender linked, or cultural. The bias could be simply promoting one theory over other or neglecting to interview some kinds of offenders. Research workers should determine and emphasize their biases to make sure that they don’t impact the study outcomes. Researchers must describe in their proposal the way they will take care of their individual biases to ensure they don’t influence the conduct and findings of the study. Some examples are: phrasing questions different ways for different individuals, and asking leading questions.
Theory validity: In the beginning of an investigation, the investigator usually has a specific theory or viewpoint that he or she feels the data will support. Research workers need to ensure that they don’t force the data to match a particular theory, nor can they ignore data that doesn’t suit the theory (discrepant data). Investigators must offer all data even if it does not support their hypotheses.
Reactivity: How much of what you are actually observing is caused because you are there? Investigators can impact both the environment and the people being observed. Getting rid of reactivity threat is actually not possible, however the investigator should be aware of it and the way it influences what is being observed. Interviewees often are reacting to the interviewer rather than the situation being observed (Maxwell). Interviewees may mislead interviewers to make themselves seem more valuable, less important, or tougher. Individuals who are being researched may stage events for the advantage of the investigator. Researchers should stay mindful of how their presence is influencing the environment and the people being observed, and exactly how this may impact the research outcomes.
In this article, we have discussed the five threats to validity in qualitative research. Such as how observations are explained and interpreted, and how the data might be purposely or unintentionally altered to match a particular theory. Researcher bias (inherit reflexivity) as well as the researcher’s presence (reactivity) can impact what is observed.
Speak Your Mind