Evaluating Interpretive Inquiry: Reviewing the Validity Debate and Opening the Dialogue

By M. Angen. Qualitative Health Research, 2000

1,199 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e002ffd67f99e1bcf119a3b6ef625d4525cc1f87

How researchers see this paper

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

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Getting “Bi” in the Family: Bisexual People's Disclosure Experiences (2015, background): “We also engaged in documenting the chain of interpretations (Angen, 2000) or audit trail (Padgett, 2008), including collecting materials such as initial and integrative memos and meeting notes to enable others to understand how we reached these conclusions.”
Justifying Knowledge, Justifying Method, Taking Action: Epistemologies, Methodologies, and Methods in Qualitative Research (2007, background): “There are, in addition, long-standing tensions within the qualitative research community over the most appropriate means by which to evaluate rigor (Angen, 2000).”
Part II. rigour in qualitative research: complexities and solutions. (2005, background): “Angen (2000) identifies member checking as a mechanism for attempting to identify a 'fixed' or 'static' truth - a 'fixed reality'.”
The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation (2018, neutral): “…checking affords the focus group discussion participants the opportunity to check for accuracy and resonance with their experiences (Doyle, 2007), the process has been criticised based on epistemological and methodological challenges as outlined by Sandelowski (1993), Morse (1994) and Angen (2000).”
Quality in Qualitative Studies: The Case of Validity, Reliability and Generalizability (2011, background): “Angen, M.J. (2000). Evaluating interpretive inquiry: Reviewing the validity debate and opening the dialogue. Qualitative Health Research, 10(3), 378-395. Arena, M., Arnaboldi, M., & Azzone, G. (2006). Internal audit in Italian organizations: A multiple case study. Managerial Auditing Journal, 21(3),”
Toward a Unified Validation Framework in Mixed Methods Research (2007, background): “These two types of understanding of the meaning of constructs require researchers and society to negotiate, dialogically, the meaning of the data within and across studies regardless of approach (Angen, 2000).”
Social procurement in UK construction projects (2016, methodology): “This combination of data were analysed using narrative analysis after the transcripts were presented back to respondents to confirm their validity (Angen, 2000).”
Validity, Responsibility, and Aporia (2010, background): “…conceptualizations and definitions of validity that could be applied to qualitative research because many authors have already done that (e.g., Angen, 2000; Cho & Trent, 2006; Creswell, 2007; Denzin & Lincoln, 2000; Guba & Lincoln, 1989; Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2004; Lather, 1993, 2007a;…”
State of Qualitative Research in Engineering Education: Meta‐Analysis of JEE Articles, 2005–2006 (2008, background): “For both classical and more recent discussions on validity in qualitative research, the readers can refer to a number of authors (Angen, 2000; Denzin and Lincoln, 2000; Devers, 1999; Hesse-Biber and Leavy, 2004; Lather, 1993; LeCompte et al., 1992; Lincoln and Guba, 1985; Schwandt, 2001) and for a…”