Validity in qualitative research revisited

By Jeasik Cho, A. Trent. 2006

1,124 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Concerns with the issues of validity in qualitative research have dramatically increased. Traditionally, validity in qualitative research involved determining the degree to which researchers’ claims about knowledge corresponded to the reality (or research participants’ construction of reality) being studied. The authors note that recent trends have shown the emergence of two quite different approaches to the validity question within the literature on qualitative research. The authors categorize and label these ‘transactional’ validity and ‘transformational’ validity. While useful, the authors assert that neither approach is sufficient to meet the current needs of the field. The authors propose a recursive, process-oriented view of validity as an alternative framework.

Subfields: Education, Management Science and Operations Research, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3fbe41027f84b18e5c7b261aca87da791b5cd680

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Ethical Data Collection and Recognizing the Impact of Semi-Structured Interviews on Research Respondents (2020, background): “Cho and Trent (2006) [27] argue that it is widely accepted that knowledge is a human construct and, as such, testimonial accounts and personal narratives [28] can inform our thinking, and have what Maxwell (1992) [29] would term interpretistic validity through constructing meaning from an emic…”
Feedback from research participants: are member checks useful in qualitative research? (2017, methodology): “(Cho & Trent 2006, p. 321) For transactional validity, member checking becomes part of the data collection process.”
CHE Principles: facilitating authentic and dialogical semi-structured interviews in educational research (2017, result): “Finally, in relation to the asserted rigour of the two studies’ research designs, both authors eschewed reliability and validity (Cho and Trent 2006) in favour of several indicators of trustworthiness (Doyle 2003).”
Altruism in tourism: Social Exchange Theory vs Altruistic Surplus Phenomenon in host volunteering (2017, methodology): “To avoid falsified interpretations of primary data, and to ensure its validity and credibility (Cho & Trent, 2006; Decrop, 1999), this study implemented data triangulation by comparing primary findings with secondary ones, namely those collected from research articles and social media.”
Member Checking (2016, background): “Ethically, this raises questions about whether the research process should be transformational (Cho & Trent, 2006).”
Reconceptualizing the Member Check Interview (2013, methodology): “I agree with Cho and Trent (2006) that these forms of validity are not necessarily held in opposition.”
An inventory of theory in logistics and SCM research (2010, methodology): “To minimize threats to validity with respect to coding we adopted a rigorous process-oriented approach (Cho and Trent, 2006), established a baseline for the categories, and met frequently to refine those categories and harmonize our individual understanding.”
Increasing collaboration and participation in smart city governance: a cross-case analysis of smart city initiatives (2017, methodology): “To increase the qualitative research credibility and validity, this study adopted data tri-angulation of data, which involved verifying facts from multiple data sources (Cho & Trent, 2006), interviews with different people and different locations, and document analyses.”
Validity, Responsibility, and Aporia (2010, background): “…has received considerable attention, and scholars have proposed a variety of conceptual and theoretical approaches to address it (e.g., Angen, 2000; Cho & Trent, 2006; Denzin & Lincoln, 2000; Guba & Lincoln, 1989; Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2004; Lather, 1993, 2007a; LeCompte, Millroy, & Preissle, 1992;…”
Theme development in qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis (2016, background): “It encompasses the description of how well the theme fits into the whole data in relation to the research question.[61, 62] Drawing maps and charts for the description of theme helps understand the nature of the study phenomenon, create typologies and find associations between themes as requirements”
Found Poems, Member Checking and Crises of Representation (2015, neutral): “Despite this coherent critique of the underlying assumptions of trustworthiness as contrary to the fundamental paradigmatic view of interpretivist inquiry, it is still frequently cited as the sign of authenticity and veracity.”