| |
 |
| David Silverman |
| Chapter 15
Quality in Qualitative Research
In this paper, Raymond Gold shows how ethnographic work can be scientifically credible.
Qualitative Inquiry, 3 (4), 388-402 (1997)
DOI 10.1177/107780049700300402
http://qix.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/3/4/388
'The ethnographic method in sociology'
Raymond L. Gold, University of Montana, USA
|
|
| |
| Using examples from a number of studies, Payne and Williams show how we can make generalizations in qualitative research.
Sociology, 39 (2), 295-314 (2005)
DOI 10.1177/0038038505050540
http://soc.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/39/2/295
'Generalization in qualitative research'
Geoff Payne, University of Plymouth, UK
Malcolm Williams, University of Plymouth, UK
|
|
| |
| What exactly do we mean by 'validity'? In this paper, Cho and Trent review various meanings and argue for a 'process-oriented' version.
Qualitative Research, 6 (3), 319-40 (2006)
DOI 10.1177/1468794106065006
http://qrj.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/6/3/319
'Validity in qualitative research revisited'
Jeasik Cho, University of Wyoming, USA
Allen Trent, University of Wyoming, USA
|
|
| |
| How should you handle apparently 'contradictory' data in an interview? In this paper, Cate Watson discusses the solution she adopted to this problem.
Qualitative Research, 6 (3), 367-84 (2006)
DOI 10.1177/1468794106065008
http://qrj.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/6/3/367
'Unreliable narrators? "Inconsistency" (and some inconstancy) in interviews'
Cate Watson, University of Aberdeen, UK
TIP
Apparent 'contradictions' in your data depend on the model you are employing. For constructionists, such contradictions may reflect the different discourses that are being used by participants.
EXERCISE
In the light of any of the papers recommended here, review your analysis of any part of your data. What claims can you make for their (a) reliability, (b) validity, (c) generalizability?
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
© Sage Publications Ltd. |
|
