transferability

Transferability in qualitative research is synonymous with generalizability, or external validity, in

quantitative research. Transferability is established by providing readers with evidence that the research
study’s findings could be applicable to other contexts, situations, times, and populations. It is important
to note that you as the researcher cannot prove that the research study’s findings will be applicable.
Instead, your job as the researcher is to provide the evidence that it could be applicable. This may sound
tricky and wish-washy, but Lincoln & Guba (1985) said it best on p. 316. “It is, in summary, not the
naturalist’s task to provide an index of transferability, it is his or her responsibility to provide the data
base that makes transferability judgements possible on the part of potential appliers.”

Each school is different in terms of what techniques they allow to establish transferability, but here we
will stick to Lincoln and Guba’s (1985) recommendation of providing thick description of the
phenomenon. Thick description may sound familiar to those who have taken a methodology course that
included a review of ethnography, and good for you for remembering that! It is actually a technique that
ethnographic researchers use extensively, but it is a technique that other qualitative researchers can use
as well. Specifically, thick description is a technique in which a qualitative researcher provides a robust
and detailed account of their experiences during data collection. A qualitative researcher makes explicit
connections to the cultural and social contexts that surround data collection. This means talking about
where the interviews occurred, the possibility of participants conducting the interview after work (which
can be exhausting), and other aspects of data collection that help provide a richer and fuller
understanding of the research setting.

This information helps the reader construct the scene that surrounds the research study, from the daily
lives of participants to the way that implicit biases may affect their responses. It is helpful to put what
participants express to the researcher into the context of the surrounding social and cultural
environments that the research study is framed around. This allows outside researchers and readers to
make the transferability judgements themselves.

Depending on their philosophical perspectives, some qualitative researchers reject the framework of
validity that is commonly accepted in more quantitative research in the social sciences. They reject the
basic realist assumption that their is a reality external to our perception of it. Consequently, it doesn’t
make sense to be concerned with the “truth” or “falsity” of an observation with respect to an external
reality (which is a primary concern of validity). These qualitative researchers argue for different
standards for judging the quality of research.