threats to validity and reliability in quantitative research

Often, the qualitative researcher has little interest in generalizing to a larger population. This inability to make an inferential leap from a sample to a population does not trouble many qualitative researchers. As a result, we usually cannot assess the validity tested by such statistics.

However, most qualitative data do not lend themselves to inferential statistical analysis.

With the data in this form, analysts can apply inferential statistics. A cult researcher could, for example, make a cross-tabulation between two variables-male/ female gender versus strong/weak belief.

More qualitative researchers are expressing their data in quantitative terms. Perhaps the community had only Catholics until recently and all residents, cult and no cult alike, were reared Catholic. We do not know how many no cult members come from a Catholic background. Neither of our two variables, former religious experience and current cult membership shows any variability. Do these data imply any connection between a Catholic upbringing and cult membership? While we might make up some theory that fits such a link, these made-up data do not support such a causal claim. Observing that one level of one variable and one level of another variable occur together says nothing about the variables’ causal linkage.įor example, suppose that observer-finds that all ten members of a cult’s cell formerly belonged to the Catholic Church. Qualitative research sometimes does not meet this requirement, for example, when it describes two aspects of behavior one of which does not vary. However, an association requires that both variables take different values. In correlation designs, causal inferences depend on the association of two variables. However, the entry of observers at or near the time of a natural experiment may change the meaning of the natural event, as illustrated in When Prophecy Fails. On the other hand, the observer may welcome the chance to see the outcome of naturally occurring changes. In practice, going native poses little threat to published research since it usually terminates the study unless the observer elects to publish a propaganda piece.Įxperimental construct validity has less relevance in qualitative studies since the researcher seldom tries to make experimental manipulations in the natural setting. Most people would find it difficult to gain the necessary trust and friendship without returning some genuine affection.Īs a result of these feelings, the observer may leave the neutral role of scientist and adopt the role of committed member in the setting, a role shift called going native.

To achieve access to the most secret behaviors and perceptions of the actors, – the observer must seem trustworthy and likable.

Threats to validity and reliability in quantitative research