RSE4801
ASSIGNMENT 4 2023
,RSE4801 – 174500
ASSIGNMENT 4
By Jade M Joseph
,
,
,Question 1
Quantitative research is the collection and analysis of numerical
data, it is often used to find patterns and averages, and make
predictions etc.
In research validity and reliability are notions that are used to
assess the quality of research. They signal how well a method,
technique or test evaluates something. Reliability is about the
steadiness of an evaluation and validity is about the precision
of an evaluation.
When doing quantitative research, it is important to evaluate
the validity and reliability of the research, to do this one must
choose the appropriate type of reliability and validity.
Types of reliability
Test-retest, this tests for steadiness with time, it tests if
the same results are repeated when the evaluation is
repeated.
Interrater, this tests for steadiness with raters or
observers, it tests if the same results are repeated with
different people but the same evaluation.
Internal consistency, this tests for steadiness of the
evaluation itself, it tests if the same results are repeated
from different parts of the test that are made to evaluate
the same thing.
Types of validity
, Construct, this tests if the evaluation is following the
existing theory and knowledge of the topic that is being
evaluated.
Content, this tests if the evaluation includes all aspects of
the topic being evaluated.
Criterion, this tests to see if the results of an evaluation
matches to other valid evaluations of the same topic.
Now that we know the different types of validity and reliability,
how do we ensure them during research. When doing research
ensuring validity should be considered in the early stages of
research. The appropriate method of evaluation should be
chosen, the method and evaluation should be high quality and
should be aimed to evaluate what you want to know. Sampling
methods should be used appropriately to choose topics, to get
valid results the population should be clearly defined and there
should be enough participants. Ensuring reliability should be
looked at throughout the data collection process. Methods
should be applied consistently; the method should be
thoroughly planned so that the same steps can be taken for
each evaluation. Conditions of research should be standardized;
data collection should be consistent so that not external factors
can influence the results.
Validity in quantitative research can be improved by being seen
as continuous as possible to improve validity in research,
however, validity in research can not be 100% achieved.
Validity should be contemplated on during each stage of the
,research. Reliability in quantitative research can be improved
by having many different questions that have the same focus
thus ensuring the internal consistency of the evaluation.
Question 2
Lincoln and Guba’s (1985) criteria for sound qualitative
research is:
Credibility, there should be confidence in the accuracy of
the findings. Do the people in the study have the
impression that the findings show their experiences. The
activities in the study should make the research more
likely to give credible findings, the activities should include
extended meetings with the people involved, negative
case analysis and triangulation of sources and
researchers. Lastly peer checking and debriefing with
other researchers can also be done to evaluate credibility.
Example: In the research there should be proof of why the
study was done, who did the study, who founded the study
etc.
Transferability, there should be proof that the findings
have use in other contexts. The findings in the study
should be usable in other settings. There should be a
detailed description of people’s responses as well as the
researchers understanding so that the transferability of
, the study is easier to evaluate. Naturalistic generalization
can happen when the outcome of the study agrees with
the experiences of the people evaluating the research and
is therefore transferable.
Example: Use the study in different contexts when giving
the study findings.
Dependability, the findings should be constant, and should
another study be done, the findings should be the same. If
another researcher did the same study would the findings
be the same, triangulation is used when doing research to
examine dependability. Another way to examine
dependability is to ask another researcher to follow the
audit trail made by the original researcher.
Example: Allow for 2 researchers to do the same study at
the same time without their knowledge therefore proving
that the study is dependable.
Confirmability, the findings should not be biased or
influenced by a biased researcher. The results should be a
result of the people responses and not a result of a
researchers “biases, motivations, interests, or
perspectives” (Lincoln and Guba, 1985:290). Auditing is
one way to evaluate the confirmability of the findings. The
more transparent the finding the easier it is to evaluate
the confirmability.
Example: Allow for an audit on the study so that people
can see that there was no outside influence.
Authenticity, the researcher needs to have different
variety of viewpoints on the subject. When evaluating the
, authenticity of the research, one should check that all the
other criteria is met. When evaluating the authenticity of
research, we are seeing the number of perspectives and
values of people in the study.
In my opinion these 5 criteria from Lincoln and Guba do ensure
the thoroughness of research in qualitative research because,
the criteria cover all the different aspects of the research so as
to not allow any biasness or unfairness towards the people
participating. The research is audited and redone to ensure
fairness.
Question 3
Lather (1986:66) redefines validity as “appropriate research
openly committed to a more just social order” by assessing the
statement of objectivity, neutrality, and value-freedom that are
frequently seen as intrinsic in traditional research approaches.
Validity is not something that can be evaluated in an unbiased
way, however, is a matter of judgement.
Lather argues that all research is loaded with value and that
researchers should be precise about the value and assumptions
so that the research that they create is valid for the specific
context that the research is being done in. She proposes that
, there are 3 different types of validity that are significant to
critical research. Those types of validity are
Content validity, this is the amount that the research truly
shows the reality of the lives of the people participating.
Technical validity, this is a term used to explain the
researcher’s methodological accuracy.
Emancipatory validity, this speaks of the amount in which
the research gives to the emancipation of the people
participating.
Lather believes that validity is not an inflexible idea but is an
issue study of degree. She says that there is no such thing as
“valid” research studies however, all research is roughly valid
dependant on the aim of the research.
Lathers approach to critical research is seen to be more
suitable. It is often inspired by a want in bringing social change
because it recognizes the researcher’s point of view and lets
research be done in a way that is accountable for those that are
in the study.
Lather believes that the idea of validity should be seen as a
process and not a property of a research study. She says that
validity is agreed upon by the people participating and the
researcher and that it is constantly being changed as the
research develops.
