Qualitatitive Paradigm ©

JEANNETTE VILLATORO


At the heart of all research is the question: what data is appropriate? I personally lean to the side of qualitative data because I am a hands-on type of person that seems to look at the whole picture and try to connect clues in that way. I am not a numbers kind of gal, so the qualitative approach peaks my interest. Qualitative data is a great tool to use in research. A researcher must ascertain if qualitative data is appropriate for not only the subject matter, but also the experiment. Since numbers aren’t the star player in this kind of research, there must be verifiable aspects that are bright and obvious to the phenomenon at hand.

Qualitative research is unique in the field. It is a way for the experimenter to jump in and observe and study something in its entirety rather than narrowing it down to certain aspects of its credentials (Davis, Smith, 2009). Usually this approach is valued with the overall picture in a holistic view, and the researcher determines the results after jumping in full force in the natural setting (Davis, Smith, 2009). Details are built rather than destructed to prove the matters of the research.

So, it may be feasible to wonder how research is conducted in a respected and verifiable manner in a field that seems to favor scientific readiness and surety with calculations. Confirmability is one of the most fundamentally significant factors involved in data analysis, especially when it has to do with qualitative data. The recorder, or experimenter that reports the findings, is at the heart of this project and the confirmability of it (Davis, Smith, 2009). There must not be any cause for bias to seep into the realm of the study or the data that is recorded. Accuracy is a must with unbiased and confirmable findings. The best way to ensure this is to have other researchers work on a report to compare what was interpreted. Another method is for the researcher to “indicate the procedures they used” (Davis, Smith, 2009, p. 51) so that anyone observing the data can check the findings and how they were brought about. And finally, coding can be used to make certain that the findings and the process of reaching them are understood. This involves “labeling and categorizing the phenomena being studied” (Davis, Smith, 2009, p. 55) as well as using distinct coding techniques to discover gaps between certain areas and by telling the story of the findings.

Because the researcher is using qualitative date, he or she must be aware of the possible scrutiny that may come from the final result. There may not be data calculations or sums to prove what was sought and collected, therefore these measures of confirmability, making sure that bias is never involved in addition to coding the data must be used to keep the nature of qualitative research alive and well and deemed as reliable as quantitative research.
References

Davis, S. F., & Smith, R. A. (2009). The Psychologist as Detective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.