Designing Qualitative Research As You Recall From Earlier We

Designing Qualitative Researchas You Recall From Earlier Weeks Variou

Describe two criteria for evaluating the quality of qualitative research designs and explain how these criteria are related to the epistemological and ontological assumptions of different philosophical orientations. Additionally, identify a potential ethical issue in qualitative research and discuss how it might influence research design decisions. Finally, explain what it means for a research topic to be suitable for scientific study using a qualitative approach.

Paper For Above instruction

Qualitative research is characterized by a focus on understanding complex social phenomena from the perspective of the participants involved. To ensure the integrity and trustworthiness of qualitative studies, researchers employ specific criteria for evaluating quality that align with their philosophical foundations, notably epistemology and ontology. Among the most prominent criteria are credibility and dependability, each serving as benchmarks for assessing the rigour of qualitative inquiry.

Credibility pertains to the accuracy and believability of the research findings. It addresses whether the interpretations accurately reflect the participants' realities. Credibility is closely linked with epistemological assumptions regarding how knowledge is constructed. For instance, constructivist paradigms, which view knowledge as subjective and co-created, emphasize validating findings through techniques such as member checking or triangulation to reinforce confidence in the results. These practices enable researchers to demonstrate that their interpretations are grounded in authentic participant perspectives, thereby supporting the credibility of the study (Golafshani, 2003).

Dependability, on the other hand, relates to the consistency and stability of the research process over time. It involves documenting procedures meticulously so that others can follow the research trail and evaluate its consistency. Dependability resonates with ontological assumptions about the nature of reality, especially in naturalistic paradigms that view social phenomena as contextually situated and dynamic (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Ensuring dependability may involve providing a detailed audit trail, which allows external reviewers to assess whether the findings are products of the research process rather than researcher bias or random variation.

Beyond these criteria, ethical considerations are vital in qualitative research. A common ethical issue is maintaining confidentiality, especially when dealing with sensitive topics or small, identifiable populations. Confidentiality concerns can influence design decisions such as choosing appropriate data collection methods, anonymizing data, or obtaining informed consent that clearly communicates confidentiality limits. Ethical dilemmas may also include balancing the need for rich, detailed data with the obligation to protect participants from harm, which might lead researchers to modify interview questions or limit data access to uphold ethical standards.

For a research topic to be amenable to qualitative inquiry, it should involve complex, contextualized human experiences that benefit from rich descriptions and deep understanding. Topics that explore subjective perceptions, cultural meanings, or social processes, such as personal health narratives, organizational culture, or community dynamics, are well-suited for qualitative approaches. These topics are typically characterized by their complexity and their demand for nuanced, interpretive analysis, which cannot be fully captured through quantitative measures. Qualitative research thus provides a means to explore the depth and richness of human phenomena in their natural settings, allowing scholars to develop comprehensive insights rooted in participants' lived experiences.

References

• Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597–606.
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.
• Smith, J. K. (1984). The problem of criteria for judging interpretive inquiry. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 6(4), 379–391.
• Burkholder, G. J., Cox, K. A., Crawford, L. M., & Hitchcock, J. H. (Eds.). (2020). Research designs and methods: An applied guide for the scholar-practitioner. Sage Publications.
• Walden University Office of Research and Doctoral Services. (2018). Research ethics & compliance: Documents and FAQs.
• Walden University. (2015). Research planning & writing: Research resources.
• Smith, J. K. (1984). The problem of criteria for judging interpretive inquiry. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 6(4), 379–391.
• Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597–606.
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.
• Walden University Office of Research and Doctoral Services. (2018). Research ethics & compliance.