DEVELOPMENTAL CRISIS IN EARLY ADULTHOOD: A ...

conclusions and findings in order to assess whether the participants consider that they
have been accurately represented and whether a model or abstraction reflects their
experience in an unbiased way (Yardley, 2000; Miles and Huberman, 1994).
Further credibility assessments are research-problem specific. If the aim of
the research is a generalisable theory or model, then credibility is enhanced by the
quality of the sample; an appropriate range, number and diversity of instances should
be sampled in order to add inductive strength to any statement of generality (Elliott,
Fischer & Rennie, 1990). General statements should also be pitched at the right level
of generality to avoid unfounded claims, while limitations to generality should be
acknowledged. Generalisability can also be enhanced by systematic comparison of
findings with existing studies in the same area (Yardley, 2000). If, on the other hand,
the aim of the research is to specify or illuminate an individual or specific event or
case then such issues of generalisation do not apply. Instead, credibility and
legitimacy are enhanced by a sufficiently thick, deep and systematic study of that
person or phenomenon (Elliott, Fischer & Rennie, 1990).
Reflexivity is the process of self-referencing and self-reflection in a research
endeavour, carried out in order to bring the researching agent into focus rather than to
render them invisible. In the composite model, reflexive sections of the report are
included to highlight the human process of the research, but also to allow the reader to
be aware of potential bias and therefore better placed to assess credibility of findings.
The assumption is that in empirical research we may grasp something in the world
that is larger than ourselves and our own limited viewpoint, which can therefore
contribute to knowledge that lasts and has relevance to others in theoretical and
applied senses. The reader is in the best position to assess whether this has been
achieved if the researcher is visible, rather than invisible.
b) Coherence
Yardley (2000) and Elliott, Fischer and Rennie (1990) both cite the coherence
of research design, results and the final report as a benchmark of quality. For
Yardley, this is principally about the “fit” between research questions, philosophical
perspective, method, form of analysis and report. A coherent report is one which has
a narrative flow, a clear use of language, a lack of contradictions and a good
symmetry between literature, findings and discussion. For Elliott, Fischer and Rennie
(1990) coherence is achieved by the integration of all codes and categories into a
60