Validity and reliability tests in case study research: Aliterature review with "hands-on" applications for eachresearch phase
»
»
Translate document into:
»
- Find similar documentsSubjects:Market research,Theory, Reliability, Validity
Classification Codes7100 Market research, 9130 Experimental/theoretical
Author(s):Andreas M RiegeDocument types:FeaturePublication title:Qualitative Market Research.Bradford:2003. Vol. 6, Iss. 2; pg. 75, 12 pgs
Source type:PeriodicalProQuest document ID:339179171Text Word Count5481Document URL:http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=339179171&sid=9&Fmt=4&clientId=5646&RQT=309&VName=
Abstract
(Document Summary)
Despite the advantages of the case study method, its reliability and validity remain in doubt. Teststo establish the validity and reliability of qualitative data are important to determine the stability andquality of the data obtained. However, there is no single, coherent set of validity and reliability testsfor each research phase in case study research available in the literature. This article presents anargument for the case study method in marketing research, examining various criteria for judgingthe quality of the method and highlighting various techniques, which can be addressed to achieveobjectivity, and rigorous and relevant information for planning to marketing actions. The purpose of this article is to invite further research by discussing the use of various scientific techniques for establishing the validity and reliability in case study research. The article provides guidelines for achieving high validity and reliability for each phase in case study research. [PUBLICATIONABSTRACT]
Full Text
(5481 words)
Copyright MCB UP Limited (MCB) 2003
[Headnote]
Keywords
[Headnote]
Case studies,
Qualitative techniques
, Reliability, Validity
[Headnote]
Abstract
[Headnote]
Despite the advantages of the case study method, its reliability and validity remain in doubt. Tests toestablish the validity and reliability of qualitative data are important to determine the stability and qualityof the data obtained. However, there is no single, coherent set of validity and reliability tests for eachresearch phase in case study research available in the literature. This article presents an argument for the case study method in marketing research, examining various criteria for judging the quality of themethod and highlighting various techniques, which can be addressed to achieve objectivity, andrigorous and relevant information for planning to marketing actions. The purpose of this article is to
þÿ
invite further research by discussing the use of various scientific techniques for establishing the validityand reliability in case study research. The article provides guidelines for achieving high validity andreliability for each phase in case study research.
IntroductionResearch in management and marketing traditionally has been based on positivist science,quantitatively oriented, along a linear deductive path. However, the position is changing for management and marketing research which "seems implicitly to assume a realist perspective"(Hunt, 1990, p. 8), a perspective, which is arguably more practitioner-oriented. Realists share thepositivists' aim of explaining and predicting social phenomena, however, where phenomena havenot yet been fully discovered and comprehended, realist investigation often seems moreappropriate to identify phenomena and transform people's experiences into verbal experiences of the researcher (Donnellan, 1995; Tsoukas, 1989). Nevertheless, it still seems that qualitativeresearch, such as case study research, is not really accepted as a rigorous alternative toestablished quantitative methods in marketing research. But then, case study research is notalways to be seen as a substitute for quantitative research. Within the realism paradigm, the focusis on the rigorously analytical method of case study research, which seems to be especiallyappropriate for two areas: the study of network systems and international business-to-businessmarketing (Johnston et al., 1999; Perry et al., 1999), rather than the merely descriptive or explanatory use of case studies. It also seems suitable for research into, for example, customer relationship marketing, consumer decision-making, customer satisfaction, and knowledgemanagement.To support the following discussion, similarities and differences between qualitative research andcase study research, that is how is case study research is different from the other qualitativemethods, need to be clarified. There are several distinguishing factors when comparing qualitativemethods. First, whereas the main objective of case study research is the development andconstruction of theory, in-depth interviews concentrate on obtaining rich and detailed information,convergent interviews on narrowing down the research focus, and focus groups on groupinteraction. Second, case studies require a medium to high level of prior theory, which is not thecase for in-depth and convergent interviews, which require no or little prior theory. Third, theprocess and content of case studies usually is (semi-) structured and follows standard procedures,whilst other methods are more flexible, with in-depth interviews ranging from being unstructured tostructured, and focus groups and convergent interviews being very unstructured. Fourth, whereasthe main strength of case study research as well as in-depth interviews lay in its replication,convergent interviews' strength is their progressive and iterative nature and focus groups' strengthis their synergistic effect in a group setting (based on Yin, 1994).This paper has four main sections: following a brief reflection on existing research and approaches,first, it provides a discussion on eminent theoretical research paradigms to set the case studymethod in perspective to other research paradigms. Second, it describes a variety of design tests(mostly used in quantitative research approaches) and corresponding design tests (mostly used inqualitative research approaches) for establishing and improving validity and reliability. Third, itdiscusses case study techniques for conducting design/corresponding design tests and phases of research in which these techniques may occur. Finally, it examines the applicability to variousresearch paradigms.BackgroundA discussion as to how the chosen research methodology can achieve validity and reliability formsan integral part of any rigorous research effort. However, few scientific techniques have beendeveloped to address the scientific worth and rigour of qualitative research, in particular case studyresearch (De Ruyter and Scholl, 1998). Rust and Cooil (1994) presented a comparative analysis of reliability approaches for both quantitative and qualitative data, and introduced a new approach tomeasure reliability by expressing reliability as the proportion of expected loss that is avoided whenthe data are used to make decisions. However, they did not present specific criteria highlightinghow to achieve a higher degree of reliability in either qualitative research or specifically case study
research. This paper will address this issue by providing some guidelines for case study research.Furthermore, Healy and Perry (2000) established six specific criteria to judge the validity andreliability of case study research, within the realism paradigm. However, what they provided was,first, a thorough comparison and discussion on theoretical paradigms and philosophicalfoundations (building on previous studies by Guba and Lincoln (1994); Perry et al. (1999); Riegeand Nair (1997)), concluding that the realism perspective appears to be the most appropriate onefor marketing researchers. We share their opinion. Second, they presented a comparative analysisof, and a link between, design tests in qualitative research and each of the theoretical paradigms(see also Riege and Nair, 1997). This discussion, however, did not conclude as to what "reallyneeds to be done" to establish validity and reliability in case study research. To address this gap,this paper provides several techniques that will guide both academic researchers in marketing andapplied marketing researchers through each phase of their research - from research design stageto report writing - in their attempt to establish validity and reliability.Whilst the literature offers some suggestions as to what techniques can enhance the validity andreliability of qualitative research, there is only little indication as to what techniques should be usedto enhance validity and reliability in case study research. This paper suggests that several of the"generic" quantitative and
qualitative techniques
and others also can be applied to the case studymethod, based upon their application in rigorous case study research of over 40 master's byresearch and doctorate students from Australia, New Zealand and the UK. That is, numerousstudents tested the suitability of applying various design tests, as discussed in the followingsections, to enhance the quality of their work. Note that this is not an empirical study based onvarious approaches of students to address validity and reliability in case study research.Essentially, I also argue that a number of design tests for establishing validity and reliability can beused for judging the quality of case study research, irrespective of their commonly more qualitativeor quantitative nature, nor of their theoretical paradigm.In particular, this paper discusses two core questions:(1) Are the tests and techniques for establishing the validity and reliability of qualitative andquantitative marketing research significantly different?(2) How far can they be used for case study research?The focus of the argument lies in the judgement of the quality of theory building, and of the rigour of analytical case studies. That is, regardless whether researchers use them as initial studies todefine or refine initially stated research propositions, or view the case study approach, as their main data collection method for the aim is to develop and build theory. A summary of availabletests and techniques for establishing validity and reliability in case study research is shown inTable I, which provides the main platform for the following discussion.Theoretical paradigms and the nature of case studiesThe following brief section describes four different paradigms to research methodology:(1) positifism;(2) realism;(3) critical theory; and(4) constructivism.Although a discussion on each of these four belief systems or worldviews that guide anyresearcher provides no or little contribution to the theory of market research, it is necessary as astarting point for the main discussion.
of 00
Validity and reliability tests in case study research
2,063 Reads
Info and Rating
| Category: | Uncategorized. |
| Rating: | |
| Upload Date: | 02/25/2008 |
| Copyright: | Attribution Non-commercial |
| Tags: |
Leave a Comment