2.4 Pulse 3
49
Table 2.1
(continued)
Validity
The research truly
measures what the
researcher intends on
measuring or, stated
differently, how truthful
the research results are
(Golafshani 2003).
Validity is not a
universal, but a
contingent construct
based on specific
research methodologies
and projects, as well as
processes (Winter 2000)
Certainty: data truly
measures reality (Weber
2004)
Researchers can proof their
collected data (Lincoln
et al. 2011)
The validity of research comes from peers
and not the subjects that we study (Guba
and Lincoln 2005; Lincoln et al. 2011)
Defensible knowledge claims
(Weber 2004), depending on
the methods used (Lincoln
et al. 2011)
These are extended
constructions of validity
through consensus, which is
based on participants and the
inquirer (Guba and Lincoln
2005; Lincoln et al. 2011)
Validity comes about when
research creates action (action
research) or participatory
research that creates positive
social change (Guba and
Lincoln 2005; Merriam 1991;
Lincoln et al. 2011)
Validity is in the ability of the
knowledge to become
transformative, according to the
findings of the experiences of the
subject. Extended validity of
constructions exists (Guba and
Lincoln 2005; Lincoln et al. 2011)
Reliability
The extent to which
results are consistent
over time, the accurate
representations of the
total population one is
studying and, if it is
possible, to reproduce
the same results using a
similar methodology. In
other words, reliability
entails the repeatability
or replicability of
observations or results
(Golafshani 2003)
Defined as replicability,
which means that
researchers can reproduce
their results (Weber 2004)
There is a statistical confidence level and
the researcher produces objectivity in
data through inquiry (Lincoln et al. 2011)
Defined as interpretive
awareness, which means that
researchers recognise and
address implications of their
subjectivity (Weber 2004)
The value of the inquiry is in
the subversion of privileges
and its ability to impart action
for the creation of a just and
fair society (Giroux 1982;
Guba and Lincoln 2005;
Lincoln et al. 2011)
There is a correspondence
between experiential,
presentational and practical
knowing. This leads to action for
the transformation of the world in
the service of human well-being
(Guba and Lincoln 2005; Lincoln
et al. 2011)
(continued)
49
Table 2.1
(continued)
Validity
The research truly
measures what the
researcher intends on
measuring or, stated
differently, how truthful
the research results are
(Golafshani 2003).
Validity is not a
universal, but a
contingent construct
based on specific
research methodologies
and projects, as well as
processes (Winter 2000)
Certainty: data truly
measures reality (Weber
2004)
Researchers can proof their
collected data (Lincoln
et al. 2011)
The validity of research comes from peers
and not the subjects that we study (Guba
and Lincoln 2005; Lincoln et al. 2011)
Defensible knowledge claims
(Weber 2004), depending on
the methods used (Lincoln
et al. 2011)
These are extended
constructions of validity
through consensus, which is
based on participants and the
inquirer (Guba and Lincoln
2005; Lincoln et al. 2011)
Validity comes about when
research creates action (action
research) or participatory
research that creates positive
social change (Guba and
Lincoln 2005; Merriam 1991;
Lincoln et al. 2011)
Validity is in the ability of the
knowledge to become
transformative, according to the
findings of the experiences of the
subject. Extended validity of
constructions exists (Guba and
Lincoln 2005; Lincoln et al. 2011)
Reliability
The extent to which
results are consistent
over time, the accurate
representations of the
total population one is
studying and, if it is
possible, to reproduce
the same results using a
similar methodology. In
other words, reliability
entails the repeatability
or replicability of
observations or results
(Golafshani 2003)
Defined as replicability,
which means that
researchers can reproduce
their results (Weber 2004)
There is a statistical confidence level and
the researcher produces objectivity in
data through inquiry (Lincoln et al. 2011)
Defined as interpretive
awareness, which means that
researchers recognise and
address implications of their
subjectivity (Weber 2004)
The value of the inquiry is in
the subversion of privileges
and its ability to impart action
for the creation of a just and
fair society (Giroux 1982;
Guba and Lincoln 2005;
Lincoln et al. 2011)
There is a correspondence
between experiential,
presentational and practical
knowing. This leads to action for
the transformation of the world in
the service of human well-being
(Guba and Lincoln 2005; Lincoln
et al. 2011)
(continued)