Validity in Qualitative Research

By R. Whittemore, S. Chase, Carol Lynn Mandle. Qualitative Health Research, 2001

1,312 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Rigor in Qualitative Social Work Research: A Review of Strategies Used in Published Articles (2011, background): “Many writers incorporated these basic concepts as criteria, and they have endured and been further developed in the literature (Golafshani, 2003; Morse, Barrett, Mayan, Olson, & spiers, 2002; schwartz-shea, 2006; whittemore et al., 2001).”
Methods and meanings: credibility and trustworthiness of qualitative research. (2014, methodology): “Secondary criteria provide additional benchmarks of validity that are not relevant to every study, but allow for flexibility and application to particular investigations (Whittemore et al., 2001).”
The inclusion of bias in reflective and reflexive research (2005, background): “…it is not used to inform and conduct the study, but on the contrary, it is argued that it should be eliminated or bracketed so as to achieve the equivalent of validity and credibility of quantitative studies (Endacott, 1994; Mays and Pope, 2000; Whittemore et al., 2001; Moseley and Mead, 2004).”
Rigour and grounded theory research. (2003, methodology): “The importance of this article can be understood by locating it within the body of work that addresses the practical application of standards of rigour in qualitative research practice (Rose & Webb 1998, Maggs-Rapport 2001, Whittemore et al. 2001, Davies & Dodds 2002).”