View/Open - ARAN - National University of Ireland, Galway

123
Chapter 3 Research Framework
have meaning in other similar situations or to “fit” in with other situations (Holloway
and Wheeler, 2011; Lincoln and Guba, 1985).
Table 3.1 Research quality criteria summarised from Shenton (2002)
Research quality judging
criteria
If the work were repeated, in
the same context, with the same
methods and with the same
participants, similar results
would be obtained. The
processes within the study
should be reported in detail,
thereby enabling a future
researcher to repeat the work, if
not necessarily to gain the same
results.
Demonstrates that all of the
evidence has been attended to.
As far as possible the work’s
findings are the result of the
experiences and ideas of the
informants, rather than the
characteristics and preferences
of the researcher.
How congruent are the findings
with reality?
Can the research have meaning
in other similar situations or
“fit” in with other situations?
The extent to which the
findings of one study can be
applied to other situations.
Qualitative term Quantitative term
Dependability Reliability
Confirmability Objectivity
Credibility Validity
Transferability Gerneralisability
Much has been written about maintaining rigour in qualitative research (Fossey et
al., 2002; Maggs-Rapport, 2000 Polit and Beck, 2006). Easton, McComish and
Greenberg (2000) stated that one way to ensure rigour in qualitative research is to
avoid pitfalls in the data collection, transcription and subsequent analysis. The areas
for potential error are equipment failure, environmental hazards and transcription.
Easton, McComish and Greenberg (2000) suggested that it is essential for the
researcher to re-listen to the interviews and to re-read the transcriptions. Common
mistakes in transcription include mis-interpretation of words, missing words, mis-
hearing of words, jargon, language barriers and punctuation mistakes. This is
supported by Lincoln and Guba (2002) who added that the quality of the qualitative
approach is equally as important to the product, i.e. judging the quality of the process
of the inquiry is different to judging the quality of the product of the inquiry. Patton