Validating qualitative research
Methods can only be validated if they were obtained legally and ethically.
Finally the use of qualitative content analysis for developing case studies is examined and evaluated. Content Analysis 4.1 Classical content analysis 4.2 Qualitative content analysis 4.2.1 Excursus: qualitative research 4.2.2 Philipp MAYRING's approach 4.2.3 Quality criteria and validation issues 5.This is not to say that these modes of dissemination replace the scholarship of qualitative research and/or the peer-reviewed journal manuscript—far from it. Discussion 5.1 Ethical issues 5.2 A further challenge: the extent of evaluation of impact References Authors Citation 1.In disseminating qualitative data, researchers have an array of presentational styles and formats to choose from that best fit their research purposes, such as drama, dance, poetry, websites, video and evocative forms of writing. Key Exemplars 4.1 Key exemplar 1: "Handle with Care? Introduction Research dissemination, as the written or oral representation of project findings, usually happens at the end of a research project (BARNES, CLOUDER, PRITCHARD, HUGHES & PURKIS, 2003; WALTER, NUTLEY & DAVIES, 2003).: Assuming there are those who do pay attention to the dissemination of qualitative research findings, what can we learn from them?For this article, we searched for examples of qualitative research where findings have been disseminated beyond the journal article and/or conference presentation.The rationale for pursuing examples of how good qualitative research has been disseminated is that we pay attention to both scientific communicative concerns.
All three exemplars in this article go beyond the forms of dissemination that traditionally serve academic communities and attempt to address the communicative concern of qualitative research findings. " 4.2 Key exemplar 2: "Syncing Out Loud" and "Busting" 4.3 Key Exemplar 3: DIPEx 4.3.1 Evaluation of DIPEx 5.
Validate the methods used to collect the data by examining the data-collection methods.
In cross-validated studies, it is common to have data from both qualitative and quantitative studies.
BRANNEN, 1992, pp.3-5; BRYMAN, 2004, pp.452-454; HAMMERSLEY, 1992, pp.39-41; KELLE, 2001, -; TASHAKKORI & TEDDLIE, 1998, pp.3-13).
One main characteristic of this dispute seems to be the dichotomous way in which qualitative and quantitative research (methods) were presented as well as the resulting strict contraposition of the two (cf. CASSELL and SYMON (1994) for instance give the following list of defining characteristics for qualitative research: "a focus on interpretation rather than quantification; an emphasis on subjectivity rather than objectivity; flexibility in the process of conducting research; an orientation towards process rather than outcome; a concern with context—regarding behaviour and situation as inextricably linked in forming experience; and finally, an explicit recognition of the impact of the research process on the research situation" (p.7).
We conclude by considering the ethical issues that may be involved in these forms of disseminating qualitative research, as well as the challenges for evaluating the impact of such strategies. In doing so, few authors of qualitative studies move beyond the dissemination of their work in the ubiquitous journal article.