Dangerous laughter steven millhauser pdf

https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781506330228/cfi/6/44!/4/2/4/2@0:0 1/3

Chapter Check-In

1. Can you identify the characteristics of “thick description” to develop a deeper understanding of how cases, settings, and themes are presented in a qualitative study?

1. Look for a detailed description in a short story or a novel. If you do not find one, you might use the story about the “Cat ‘n’ Mouse” as found in Steven Millhauser’s book (2008), Dangerous Laughter.

2. Next, identify passages in which Millhauser (2008) creates detail by physical passages, movement, or activity description.

3. Finally, identify how the author interconnects the details.

2. Can you identify validation strategies for enhancing the accuracy of your study within one of the five approaches? Read qualitative journal articles or books that adopt different strategies.

1. Underline examples of the strategy in use and consider its effectiveness. 2. Could the strategy be used as effectively in other approaches? 3. How would different approaches impact your use of various validation strategies?

3. What intercoder agreement procedures can you use to practice assessing reliability across coders? 1. To conduct this practice, obtain a short text file, which may be a transcript of an interview; field

notes typed from an observation; or a digital file of a document, such as a newspaper article. 2. Next, have two or more coders go through a transcript and record their codes. Then look at the

passages all coders have identified and see whether their codes are similar or match. 3. Look back at the procedures we propose for intercoder agreement in Figure 10.2 and see which

were easy to implement and more challenging. 4. Do you see the key characteristics of each of the five approaches that might be used in evaluating a study?

Select one of the approaches, find a journal article that uses the approach, and then see if you can find the key characteristics of evaluation of that approach in the article.

Summary

In this chapter, we discussed validation, reliability, and standards of quality in qualitative research. Validation approaches vary considerably, such as strategies that emphasize using qualitative terms comparable to quantitative terms, the use of distinct terms, perspectives from postmodern and interpretive lenses, syntheses of different perspectives, descriptions based on metaphorical images, or some combination of these perspectives on validity. Reliability is used in qualitative research in several ways, one of the most popular being the use of intercoder agreements when multiple coders analyze and then compare their code segments to establish the reliability of the data analysis process. A detailed procedure for establishing intercoder agreement is described in this chapter. Also, diverse standards exist for establishing the quality of qualitative research, and these criteria are based on procedural perspectives, postmodern perspectives, and interpretive perspectives. Within each of the five approaches to inquiry, specific standards also exist; these were reviewed in this chapter. Finally, we advanced standards that we use to assess the quality of studies presented in each and compare across the five approaches.

Further Readings

In addition to many of the resources already suggested in earlier chapters that include perspectives and guidance for evaluation, validation, and reliability in qualitative research, we highlight a few key resources here. The list should not be considered exhaustive and readers are encouraged to seek out additional readings in the end-of-book reference list.

Resources Focused on Validation Perspectives Angen, M. J. (2000). Evaluating interpretive inquiry: Reviewing the validity debate and opening the dialogue. Qualitative Health Research, 10, 378–395. doi:10.1177/104973230001000308

Maureen Jane Angen traces the origins of validity and suggests its application within interpretive approaches. In so doing, she relates validity to terms of trustworthiness and validation strategies.

https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781506330228/epub/OEBPS/s9781506330181.i1409.xhtml#s9781506330181.i1439
6/2/2018 Bookshelf Online: Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches

https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781506330228/cfi/6/44!/4/2/4/2@0:0 2/3

Lincoln, Y. S., Lynham, S. A., & Guba, E. G. (2011). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 97–128). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

In this chapter, the authors revisit many issues from earlier handbook editions and advance their view of the essential role of authenticity within discussions of validity and ethical research.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

In this classical text, Yvonna Lincoln and Egon Guba describe the alternative terms for validation in qualitative research that remain in use today. This is a must-read for many researchers.

Whittemore, R., Chase, S. K., & Mandle, C. L. (2001). Validity in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 11, 522– 537. doi:10.1177/104973201129119299

In their exploration of validity issues in 13 writings of qualitative research, Robin Whittemore and colleagues extract key validation criteria and organize into four primary and six secondary criteria. The article also provides a comprehensive description of historical development of validity issues in qualitative research.

Resources Focused on Reliability Perspectives Armstrong, D., Gosling, A., Weinman, J., & Marteau, T. (1997). The place of inter-rater reliability in qualitative research: An empirical study. Sociology, 31, 597–606. doi:10.1177/0038038597031003015

The authors use the assessment of inter-rater reliability among six researchers as a springboard for discussing procedures of conducting intercoder agreement checks. Noteworthy is their focus on key issues related to what coding agreements specify.

Campbell, J. L., Quincy, C., Osserman, J., & Pederson, O. K. (2013). Coding in-depth semistructured interviews: Problems of unitization and intercoder reliability and agreement. Sociological Methods & Research, 42, 294–320. doi:10.1177/0049124113500475

The authors provide practical procedures for reliability of coding in an exploratory study. Of particular interest was the discussion related to the possible impact of coder knowledge of the text being coded.

Richards, L. (2015). Handling qualitative data: A practical guide (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lyn Richards provides accessible information for guiding researchers in generating reliable coding and valid interpretations of qualitative data. The text is organized by setting up, handling, and making sense of data.

Silverman, D. (2013). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

David Silverman provides practical guidance for planning and conducting high-quality qualitative research. Of particular note is his discussion on reliability and illustrative examples embedded throughout.

Resources Focused on Qualitative Evaluation Criteria Howe, K., & Eisenhardt, M. (1990). Standards for qualitative (and quantitative) research: A prolegomenon. Educational Researcher, 19(4), 2–9. doi:10.3102/0013189X019004002.

Kenneth Howe and Margaret Eisenhardt contribute important discussions of quality standards related to driver of research, methodological competence, the making researcher assumptions explicit, study warrant, and practical and theoretical implications. An essential read for understanding historical developments.

Lincoln, Y. S. (1995). Emerging criteria for quality in qualitative and interpretive research. Qualitative Inquiry, 1, 275–289. doi:10.1177/107780049500100301

In this work, Yvonna Lincoln relates the researcher’s relationship with research participants as a measure of quality—for example, meeting ethical standards such as reciprocity would serve as necessary criteria.

Richardson, L., & St. Pierre, E. A. (2005). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 959–978). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

6/2/2018 Bookshelf Online: Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches

https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781506330228/cfi/6/44!/4/2/4/2@0:0 3/3

Laurel Richardson and Elizabeth Adams St. Pierre offer two individual yet complementary perspectives on evaluative criteria. A hidden gem is their discussion at the end of the chapter of creative analytical writing practices.