This document discusses quality in qualitative research. It defines quality as pertaining to study design, methods, and protection against bias. There are various terms used to describe quality in qualitative research related to validity, credibility, and trustworthiness. Two perspectives for thinking about quality are discussed: the lens of the researcher, participants, or external people, as well as assumptions based on research paradigms like postpositivist or constructivist. A method matrix shows different quality assurance techniques matched to paradigms and lenses. The author's own research plans to use techniques like researcher reflexivity, triangulation, audit trails, and thick description to ensure quality.

1. Quality Qualitative
Research
NanYang
nan.yang@unitn.it
Doctoral School of Psychological Sciences and Education
University of Trento
1
Friday, August 9, 13

2. Outline
• Define Quality in Research
• Two Perspectives for Thinking Quality Issues
• Method Matrix for Quality Qualitative Research
• Quality Assurance in My PhD Research
• Discussion
2
Friday, August 9, 13

3. Define Quality
• Quality research most commonly refers to the
scientific process encompassing all aspects of
study design; in particular, it pertains to the
judgment regarding the match between the
methods and questions, selection of subjects,
measurement of outcomes, and protection
against systematic bias, nonsystematic bias, and
inferential error (Shavelson, 2002)
3
Friday, August 9, 13

4. Define Quality
• Terms for Quality in Qualitative Research
• validity, authenticity, goodness, adequacy,
trustworthiness, plausibility, credibility,
dependability, neutrality, confirmability,
consistency, applicability, transferability,
reliability...
4
Friday, August 9, 13

5. Two Perspectives
• The lens researchers choose to validate
their studies
• researchers, participants, individual external...
• Research paradigm assumptions
• postpositivist, constructivist, critical...
5
Friday, August 9, 13

6. Method Matrix
(Creswell&Miller, 2000)
Paradigm/
Lens
Postpositivist Constructivist Critical
Lens of
Researcher
Lens of
Participants
Lens of
People
External
Triangulation
Disconfirming
evidence
Research
reflecivity
Member
checking
Prolonged
engagement
Collaboration
The audit trail
Thick, rich
description
Peer
Debriefing
6
Friday, August 9, 13

7. Quality Assurance
• Already used method
• Researcher reflexivity
• Methods in plan
• Triangulation
• Audit trail (external experts)
• Peer debrief (research team members)
• Thick, rich description (field notes)
7
Friday, August 9, 13

8. Discussion
• About Quality
• To adopt methods in different paradigm
assumptions?
• To invite other researchers to code the data?
• About Research Methodology
• Research planVS theoretical sampling
• Grounded theoryVS thematic analysis
8
Friday, August 9, 13

9. Reference
• Shavelson, R. J., & Towne, L. (Eds.). (2002). Scientific research in education.
Washington, DC: National Research Council, National Academy Press.
• Lincoln,Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
• Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative
research.The Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597-606
• Creswell, J.W. & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative
inquiry. Theory intoPractice, 39(3), 124-131
• Davies, D., & Dodd, J. (2002). Qualitative research and the question of rigor.
Qualitative Health research, 12(2), 279-289
9
Friday, August 9, 13