Hi everyone : ) I am writing my Methodology chapter right now and I am wondering ... do I have to write something about VALIDITY ?


It seems that it is something which the examiners need to know but not something which i need to write about .. after all there are different understandings of what Validity is ..

(robin) :p

======= Date Modified 25 Aug 2011 22:04:49 =======
Validity is a key concept in research but it depends on your study how much depth you have to go into, for example, if you were developing/administering a questionnaire it is essential to talk about both validity and reliability.

thanks Syd11 for passing by .. my study was purely qualitative .. I guess I need to write something !

But did you write something about Validity in your thesis ?

I mean is it essential to write about it in the methodology chapter ?

Gosh .. cause I am really tired by now since i have been writing (for ever !) and want to put an end to the methodology chapter :-(

My study utilised mixed-methods so I had to talk about it for the quantitative element, the methodology can be a tricky chapter to write depending on your study and the methods used, so well done for getting this far. Letts et al. (2007) provide a nice summary of the issues in relation to qual research.

Rigour in qualitative studies is critical. While in quantitative research one discusses concepts
such as reliability and validity, qualitative researchers argue for the use of different
terminology when determining the rigour of a qualitative study (Guba & Lincoln, 1989;
Krefting, 1991; Taylor, 2000). The overarching concept when considering rigour is
trustworthiness.

http://www.srs-mcmaster.ca/Portals/20/pdf/ebp/qualguidelines_version2.0.pdf

I am doing a qual. based project and have a fair bit on reliability and validity. One of my advisers was pretty hung up on that notion, so that is probably a factor in the 3+ pages that I have covering that issue.
Just a thought for you to chew over, if the examiners need to know about it, don't you have to write about it? The thesis is supposed to be able to (more or less) stand on its own merits.

The thing is you can't second guess what the examiners will concentrate on - if you already know who they will be then read some of their published work to see what they have written about their methods, that will give you an indication of where they are coming from. It may be the case that you just have to do this work to please your adviser and sometimes it is better to go with what they say to keep the relationship plain sailing.

I did a qual study based on detailed interviews with emerging themes and concepts. in my case, I wrote about how the themes etc I identified were validated by cross checking against different data sources, different interviews, and then in some focus groups. They essentially wanted to know how I could demonstrate that I hadn't conjured the themes up myself and that they were real.

I'm doing mixed methods too and I'd say validity is vital. I've not written much about it on methods though, I just justified why my chosen method was the most appropriate for this particular study. I discussed validity throughout results and discussion. Like Kikuka, I provided evidence of where my results arose from and provided an audit trail as well.

What method are you using if you don't mind me asking? Maybe if you let us know, there may be someone here who's used it and might be able to help you a bit more?