Validity in qualitative research

Introduction
In this section we will learn about validity which is concerned with acceptability. Validity in
qualitative research means “suitability” of the implements, procedures, and information in a
document. Whether the research question is valid for the desired outcome, the choice of
methodology is appropriate for answering the research question, the design is valid for the
methodology, the sampling and data analysis is applicable, and lastly the outcomes and
conclusions are valid for the sample and context. In measuring validity of qualitative
research, the encounter can start from the ontology and epistemology of the issue being
studied, e.g. the concept of “individual” is seen differently between humanistic and positive
psychologists due to contradictory philosophical viewpoints or outlooks where humanistic
psychologists have faith in “individual” is a product of existential consciousness and social
communication or contact, positive psychologists think the “individual” exists side-by-side
with formation of any human being. Set off in diverse pathways, qualitative research
regarding the individual's wellbeing will be concluded with varying validity. Choice of
methodology must enable detection of findings/phenomena in the appropriate context for it to
be valid, with due regard to culturally and contextually variable. For sampling, procedures
and methods must be appropriate for the research pattern and be distinct between systematic,
purposeful or theoretical (adaptive) sampling where the systematic sampling has no a
priori theory, purposeful sampling often has a definite goal or outline and theoretical
sampling is shaped by the ongoing process of data collection and theory in development in
progress.

Validity in qualitative research

Validity is generally defined as the state of being well grounded or justifiable, relevant,
significant, rational, confirming to receive values or the quality of being sound, just, and well
founded. The matters surrounding the use and nature of the term validity in qualitative
research are controversial and several. It is a highly argued issue both in social and
educational research and is still often a subject of debate. The traditional criteria
for validity find their origins in a positivist tradition, and to an extent, positivism has been
defined by a systematic theory of validity. Validity is rooted from empirical conceptions as
universal laws, evidence, objectivity, truth, actuality, deduction, reason, fact, and
mathematical data, to name only a few. Validity in research is concerned with the accuracy
and truthfulness of scientific findings. A valid study should demonstrate what actually exists
and is accurate, and a valid instrument or measure should actually measure what it is
supposed to measure.

Although the tests and measures used to create the validity and dependability of quantitative
research cannot be functional to qualitative research, there are ongoing arguments about
whether terms such as validity, reliability and generalizability are applicable to assess
qualitative research. In the broadest context these terms are relevant, with validity referring to
the integrity and use of the methods undertaken and the exactness in which the findings
accurately reflect the data, while reliability describes consistency within the employed logical
processes. However, if qualitative methods are integrally unlike from quantitative methods in
terms of philosophical situations and purpose, then alterative frameworks for creating rigidity
are proper. Lincoln and Guba offer alternative criteria for establishing rigour within
qualitative research namely truth value, consistency and neutrality and applicability.
Below outlines the differences in terminology and criteria used to evaluate qualitative
research.
Traditional criteria for judging alternative criteria for judging
Quantitative research qualitative research
Internal validity credibility
External validity transferability
Reliability dependability
Objectivity conformability

Steps in Ensuring Validity

The first step in ensuring validity is choosing a well-trained and skilled mediator or
facilitator.  A good moderator will check personal bias and expectations at the door.  He or
she is interested in learning as much candid information from the research participants as
possible, and respectful impartiality is a must if the goal is valid qualitative research.  For this
aim, organizations often employ mediators from outside the group or organization to help
guarantee that the replies are genuine and not influenced by “what we want to hear.”  For
some academic applications, the moderator will disclose his or her perspectives and biases in
the reporting of the data as a matter of full disclosure.
Another way to promote validity is to employ a strategy known as triangulation.  To
accomplish this, the research is done from multiple perspectives. This could take the form of
using several moderators, different locations, multiple individuals analysing the same data . . .
essentially any technique that would inform the results from different angles.   For some
applications, for example, an organization may choose to run focus groups in parallel through
two entirely different validity in qualitative research can also be checked by a technique
known as respondent validation.  This technique involves testing initial results with
participants to see if they still ring true. Although the research has been interpreted and
condensed, participants should still recognize the results as authentic and, at this stage, may
even be able to refine the researcher’s understanding.

Another technique to establish validity is too active 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 there 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.

Conclusion
To sum up, validity in qualitative research is debating both social and educational
argument. But we can confirm that validity indeed is associated with accuracy and
truthfulness of scientific findings.
Reference
 conjointly.com
 ebn.bmj.com
 journals.lww.com
 www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
 www.researchgate.net
 www.statiticssolutions.com