List The Four Criteria For Assessing The Rigor Of Qualitativ

List the four criteria for assessing the rigor of qualitative studies

According to Issel (2014), the four criteria for assessing the rigor of qualitative studies are credibility, transferability, dependability, and conformability. These criteria help ensure the quality and trustworthiness of qualitative research findings and are essential for evaluating the validity of a study’s conclusions.

Credibility refers to the confidence in the truth of the findings and whether the results accurately reflect the participants' perspectives. To address this criterion, I would employ member checking in my plan, where I would present preliminary findings to program participants to confirm accuracy and resonance with their experiences (Issel, 2014, p. 509). This ensures that the interpretations are grounded in participants' realities.

Transferability concerns the extent to which the findings can be applied in other contexts or settings. To enhance transferability, I would provide a thick description of the research context, including detailed demographic and contextual information, so that others can determine if the findings are applicable to similar settings (Issel, 2014, p. 509).

Dependability addresses the stability of data over time and under different conditions. To establish dependability, I would maintain an audit trail documenting all research processes, decisions, and methodological changes which can be reviewed by peers to verify consistency over the course of the study (Issel, 2014, p. 509).

Conformability ensures that findings are shaped by the participants and not researcher bias. I would address this criterion by using reflexive journaling and peer debriefing to monitor and control for researcher bias, ensuring that the interpretations are supported by the data rather than personal beliefs (Issel, 2014, p. 509).

Discuss when and why to use or not use numbers in presenting qualitative results

Qualitative research typically emphasizes depth and richness of data, capturing complex phenomena through descriptions, themes, and narratives rather than numerical measurement. However, there are specific circumstances where using numbers can enhance the presentation of qualitative results.

When using methods such as content analysis or thematic analysis, quantifying certain aspects—like the frequency of themes or codes—can help illustrate the prominence or variability of themes across participants (Cavusgil et al., 2014). For example, reporting that 15 out of 20 interviewees mentioned a specific barrier emphasizes its significance within the sample. This numerical representation provides readers with a sense of prevalence, aiding in understanding the data’s scope.

Conversely, it would be inappropriate to rely heavily on numbers in narrative interviews aimed at exploring participants’ experiences in-depth. Such methods are designed to understand subjective meanings, where the richness of individual stories outweighs the need for quantification (Hill, Cronk, & Wickramasekera, 2013). Over-reliance on numbers in these contexts could diminish the nuance and complexity of participants’ perspectives and undermine the depth-oriented nature of qualitative research.

In summary, quantitative elements can complement qualitative data when they highlight the frequency or distribution of themes, especially in larger samples, but they should not replace detailed narrative descriptions that convey context, process, and meaning.

References

  • Issel, L. M. (2014). Health program planning and evaluation: A practical systematic approach for community health (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones and Bartlett.
  • Cavusgil, S. T., Knight, G., Riesenberger, J. R., Rammal, H. G., & Rose, E. L. (2014). International business. Pearson Australia.
  • Hill, C. W., Cronk, T., & Wickramasekera, R. (2013). Global business today. McGraw-Hill Education (Australia).
  • Verbeke, A. (2013). International business strategy. Cambridge University Press.
  • Joshi, R. M. (2009). International Business. Oxford University Press.
  • Mulliner, E., Smallbone, K., & Maliene, V. (2013). An assessment of sustainable housing affordability using a multiple criteria decision making method. Omega, 41(2), 270–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2012.05.002
  • UN-Habitat. (2017). Affordable land and housing in Africa. Retrieved from https://unhabitat.org
  • Kim, C., & Hwang, P. (1992). Global strategy and multinationals' entry mode choice. Journal of International Business Studies, 23(1), 29-51.
  • Angstrom Real-estate. (n.d.). Expanding operations presentation outline.
  • Rakesh, M. J. (2009). International Business. Oxford University Press.

Related Assignments