Which three criteria are associated with the evaluation of qualitative research?
Reliability, validity and coherence
Coherence, resonating with readers and reliability
Situating the sample, reliability and grounding in examples
Coherence, resonating with readers and owning one’s perspective
Which are some of Lucy Yardley’s (2008) open-ended, flexible principles for judging the quality of qualitative analysis?
Sensitivity to context, validity and reliability
Sensitivity to context, commitment and rigour and transparency and coherence
Commitment and rigour, generalisability and transferability
Transferability, dependability and member checking
It is appropriate to use member checking as a credibility check when:
You have used discourse analysis to analyse your data
You are unsure if your analysis is correct
Your analysis aims to stay close to participants’ perspectives
You have produced a theoretical and conceptual interpretation of your data
You can ‘situate your sample’ by:
Disclosing identifying information about your participants
Describing what your participants were wearing during the interview
Providing a detailed summary of the demographic information you collected
Agreeing and disagreeing with your participants
In order to ‘ground in examples’ it is important to:
Discuss relevant literature
Support your analytic claims with illustrative data extracts
Provide an in-depth analysis of one, long data extract
Ensure there is a good fit between the data extracts and your analytic commentary
In a 10,000 word report, the introduction section should be about:
5,000 words long
2,500 words long
4,000 words long
1,000 words long
The purpose of a literature review in a qualitative research report is to:
Contextualise your research
Show how much you have read
Critique the methodological flaws of existing research and show how you will overcome them
Show how your study will relate to quantitative research
In the general discussion section of a qualitative report, it is always important to:
Introduce new material
Show how your research is better than quantitative research
Discuss the limitations of your sample
Evaluate the limitations of your research
Editing a draft of your report:
Is only important if you have used discourse analysis
Is only necessary to correct typos
Is an important part of good academic writing
Is only necessary when you are not happy with what you have written
One of the features of good qualitative poster design is:
Lots of text that tells the reader everything about the project
A font that can be read from 6-8 feet away
A really fancy font
A font that can be read from 2-4 feet away
A visually pleasing qualitative poster uses:
Lots of different colours
Lots of text
Lots of tables and figures
One or two background colours
Qualitative posters are easier to read when:
There is lighter text against a darker background
When text is presented in large blocks
There is darker text against a lighter background
When all the text is bullet pointed
Reliability is not a meaningful criteria for judging the quality of qualitative research because:
Qualitative research is biased
Qualitative research is unscientific
The findings of qualitative research will inevitably bear the mark of the researcher
Qualitative research has limited generalisability
One of the key quality criteria for discursive research is:
Member checking
Reader validation
Peer debriefing
Triangulation
Member checking assumes that:
Participants are the ultimate authority on their experience
Researchers are biased
Qualitative research is subjective
It’s difficult to produce good quality qualitative research
Providing a ‘thick description’ to enable another researcher to determine whether they can ‘safely’ transfer your findings to another context is Lincoln and Guba’s (1989) definition of:
Credibility checking
Negative case analysis
Transferability
Elliot et al.’s (1999) guidelines for the publishability of qualitative research, include:
Respect of participants
Appropriate discussion
Owning one’s perspective
Appropriate methods
Credibility checks such as member checking are problematic in discourse analytic research because:
It takes too long
Participants will disagree with the findings
The analyst has the best insight into the data
The analysis does not aim to capture participants’ perspectives on their experiences
Some of the problems with member checking include:
Participants’ reluctance to disagree with the researcher’s interpretations
The difficulty of engaging participants in the process
Participants’ comments on the interpretations may be motivated by something other than helping the researcher best understand their experiences
All of the above
When giving an oral presentation of qualitative research you should:
Include as much information as possible on your PowerPoint slides
Use PowerPoint selectively to highlight key points and show data extracts
Not include any data quotes
Only discuss one theme
