چکیده:
Most qualitative research is based on the interpretive paradigm, whose foundations and principles are different from those of the positivist paradigm and quantitative research. Therefore, qualitative researchers should be vigilant in using research concepts and criteria rooted in the positivist paradigm and look at these concepts and criteria from the ontological and epistemological perspective of the interpretive paradigm. One of the major ambiguities and challenges that qualitative researchers face is the issue of validity in qualitative research. Qualitative researchers have had different positions on this concept, and in this regard, some researchers have worked on providing typologies of it by defining the concept appropriately in the context of the interpretive paradigm and have provided strategies to promote it.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Kirk & Miller, 1986, Erikson, 1989, Kvale, 1989, Wolcott, 1990, Maxwell, 1992, Norris, 1997, Johnson, 1997, Myers, 2000, Healy & Perry, 2000, Winter, 2000, Stenbacka, 2001, Golafshani, 2003 and quantitative research have, therefore, utilizing these concepts in the interpretive paradigm and qualitative research requires redefining them based on the epistemology and ontology of this paradigm.
Strategy Description Extensive field study Collecting information from the context by researchers as much as possible over an extended period of time Minimal intervention in description[1] Using descriptive phrases such as "quotation") Reporting the phenomenon according to the narrative of the informant) Data pluralism Using various data sources to better understand a phenomenon Method pluralism Using several research methods to study a phenomenon Observer pluralism Using several observers (researchers) in collecting and interpreting data Theory pluralism Using several theories and approaches to interpret and explain data Participant feedback Presenting interpretations and results to participants by the researcher and identifying and correcting misunderstandings Receiving opinions from colleagues Reviewing the researcher's explanations and results by other researchers and colleagues Unexpected cases Searching and investigating cases inconsistent with the researcher's explanations Reflexivity Researcher's self-awareness and self-criticism regarding his potential biases and how they affect the process and results of the research Consistency with theoretical pattern Predicting a series of results based on the explained pattern and then determining the degree of conformity of actual results with the predicted pattern Table 1- Strategies for Promoting Qualitative Research Validity (Johnson, 1997) Descriptive Validity[2] Descriptive validity refers to the accuracy of the data subject reported by the researcher (Maxwell[3], 1992, p.
(
, 
, 
)
