Assessing validity and reliability in research is fundamental to ensure that the data collection
instruments and the information gathered are consistent in obtaining the insights derived from
the analysis of a study's variables.
Three are presented below with their respective criteria for identifying the quality of a study:
Social Scientific Research
This method of research combines empirical observations with forms of reasoning, and that is
why researchers using this paradigm evaluate based on five criteria (Croucher and CronnMills, 2021, 68 - 71):
●
●
●
●
●
●
Precision: This Is how accurate are at measuring your variables.
Power: There is conceptual and methodological power. The first refers to the fact that
definitions are powerful when they are broad and detailed rather than niche.
The second refers to how it is best for data selection procedures to be as
representative as possible of the population.
Parsimony: It is the combination of precision and power, in the direction of measuring
the quality of the information.
Reliability: The probability that an asset will perform adequately for a given period of
time under specific operating conditions.
Validity: Refers to the degree to which an instrument measures what it is supposed to
measure.
Interpretive Research
This paradigm maintains that reality is constructed through subjective perceptions and
interpretations, and therefore the criteria for evaluations are different from the social scientific
paradigm.
Tracy (2010) identifies eight criteria for evaluating the quality of research:
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Worthy topic: the criterion is met if the topic is meaningful, relevant, and transcendent.
Rich rigor: Rigor exists if the credibility, authenticity, trustworthiness, and integrity of
the proposed results are assured.
Sincerity: If the research is honest and genuine about the mishaps that occurred, the
quality standard is met.
Credibility: It arises from whether the results are true for the people who were studied
concerning the research phenomenon.
Resonance: If cases or quotes of adequate value are used, the criterion is met.
Contribution: This corresponds to the quality of the advances and results generated by
the research.
Ethical: If there are standards regarding informed consent, risk prevention,
privacy/confidentiality guarantees, etc., the standard is met.
Coherence: If the study has a logical articulation between objectives, methodologies,
and evaluation, it meets the criterion.
Critical and Cultural Research:
The focus in this paradigm is based on subjectivity, ideology, critique, and power, and
therefore, the criteria of the interpretive paradigm also apply in research of this type. (Croucher
& Cronn-Mills, 2021, 73)
However, this paradigm must be evaluated based on reflexivity to recognize the quality of the
research.
Reflexivity, as a researcher's ability, refers to the connection between the researcher and the
research situation. This, because it is understood as a process in which the researcher reflects
on the research to critically examine the effect it has on the study and the impact of the
interactions with the participants.
References
Croucher, S. M., & Cronn-Mills, D. (2021). Understanding Communication Research
Methods: A Theoretical and Practical Approach. Routledge.
Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative Quality: Eight “Big-Tent” Criteria for Excellent
Qualitative Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121