Typically When Speaking Of Validity In Qualitative Re 453262

Typically When Speaking Of Validity Qualitative Researchers Are Refe

Discuss two criteria used to evaluate the quality of qualitative research designs, and explain how these criteria are associated with the underlying epistemological and ontological assumptions of different philosophical orientations. Additionally, identify a potential ethical issue in qualitative research, describing how it could influence research design decisions. Lastly, clarify what it entails for a research topic to be suitable for scientific investigation through a qualitative approach, supporting your explanation with references from the week's learning resources and three scholarly sources.

Paper For Above instruction

Evaluating the quality of qualitative research involves specific criteria that ensure the credibility and validity of findings, given the unique nature of qualitative methodologies. Two prominent criteria are credibility and dependability. Credibility pertains to the confidence in the truth of the findings, similar to internal validity in quantitative research, and hinges on methods such as triangulation, prolonged engagement, and member checking (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Dependability, analogous to reliability, considers whether the research process is consistent and capable of being replicated, which can be established through detailed documentation and audit trails (Shenton, 2004). These criteria are inherently linked to the philosophical underpinnings of qualitative research, especially its epistemological and ontological assumptions.

From an epistemological perspective, qualitative research often aligns with interpretivism, which posits that reality is socially constructed and subjective, emphasizing understanding individuals' meanings and experiences (Creswell & Poth, 2018). Ontologically, it tends to adopt a relativist view, asserting that multiple realities exist based on individuals’ perspectives rather than a singular objective reality. Consequently, these assumptions influence quality criteria: credibility becomes paramount because research seeks to represent participants' perspectives authentically, while dependability ensures that the process is transparent and trustworthy within the subjective paradigm. Conversely, in pragmatic or post-positivist orientations, criteria might adapt to emphasize confirmability and transferability, reflecting differing ontological and epistemological truths and standards specific to those paradigms.

An ethical issue frequently encountered in qualitative research involves maintaining confidentiality and managing participants' power dynamics. For example, research on sensitive topics such as mental health or trauma requires strategic decisions to protect participants' identities while ensuring authentic data collection. Failure to address confidentiality risks harm to participants and could bias data collection, influencing questions, sampling, and data handling strategies. Ethical considerations might lead researchers to choose anonymization techniques or limit data dissemination, which can affect the depth and richness of insights gathered (Orb, Eisenhauer, & Wynaden, 2001). Ethical rigor is not only a moral obligation but also enhances research trustworthiness and validity by fostering honest and open engagement with participants.

A research topic is considered suitable for qualitative investigation when it involves understanding complex, contextual, or subjective phenomena that are less amenable to quantification. Topics like lived experiences, cultural practices, or social processes benefit from qualitative approaches because they enable in-depth exploration and rich descriptions that capture nuance and meaning (Denzin & Lincoln, 2018). Such topics typically involve an emergent design, flexible data collection methods like interviews or observations, and a focus on participant perspectives rather than hypothesis testing. Appropriateness is further established when research aims to generate contextualized insights rather than generalizable facts, aligning with qualitative paradigms' core philosophical assumptions (Creswell & Poth, 2018).

References

• Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
• Orb, A., Eisenhauer, L., & Wynaden, D. (2001). Ethics in qualitative research. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 33(1), 93–96.
• Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22(2), 63–75.