ISSUES IN

RESEARCH
RELIABILITY AND
VALIDITY CHECKS

CHIARA MAYE I. NOTARTE

 Validity and reliability are two important
characteristics of behavioral measure and are referred
to as psychometric properties.
It is important to bear in mind that validity and
reliability are not an all or none issue but a matter of
degree.
RELIABILITY
 Research requires dependable measurement.
(Nunnally) Measurements are reliable to the extent that they
are repeatable and that any random influence which tends to
make measurements different from occasion to occasion or
circumstance to circumstance is a source of measurement error.
(Gay) Reliability is the degree to which a test consistently
measures whatever it measures. Errors of measurement that
affect reliability are random errors and errors of measurement
that affect validity are systematic or constant errors.
VALIDITY
 Validity is the extent to which a test measures what it is
supposed to measure. The question of validity is raised in the
context of the three points, the form of the test, the purpose of
the test and the population for whom it is intended. Therefore,
we cannot ask the general question “Is this a valid test?”. The
question to ask is “how valid is this test for the decision that I
need to make?” or “how valid is the interpretation I propose for
the test?” We can divide the types of validity into logical and
empirical.
 Are the terms Reliability and Validity relevant
to ensuring credibility in Qualitative Research?
 Qualitative research is frequently criticized for
lacking of scientific rigour with poor justification of
the methods adopted, lack of transparency in the
analytical procedures and the findings being merely a
collection of personal opinions subject to research
bias.
 For the novice researcher, demonstrating rigour
when undertaking qualitative research is challenging
because there is no accepted consensus about the
standards by which such research should be judged.
 Although the tests and measures used to
establish the validity and reliability of quantitative
research cannot be applied to qualitative research,
there are ongoing debates about whether terms such
as validity and reliability are appropriate to evaluate
qualitative research.
 In the broadest context these terms are
applicable, with validity referring to the integrity and
application of the methods undertaken and the
precision in which the findings accurately reflect the
data, whilst reliability describes consistency within the
employed analytical procedures.
 However, if qualitative methods are inherently
different from quantitative methods in terms of
philosophical positions and purpose, then alternative
frameworks for establishing rigour are appropriate.
 Licoln and Guba offered alternative criteria for
demonstrating rigour within qualitative research
namely truth value and consistency and neutrality.
 QUALITATIVE RESEARCH ALTERNATIVE TERMINOLOGY
TERMINOLOGY & APPLICATION ASSOCIATED WITH CREDIBILITY
TO QUALITATIVE RESEARCH OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
VALIDITY TRUTH VALUE
The precision in which the findings accurately reflect Recognizes that multiple realities exist; the
the data. researchers’ outline personal experiences and
viewpoints that may have resulted in methodological
bias; clearly and accurately presents participants
perspectives.
RELIABILITY CONSISTENCY
The consistency of the analytical procedures, Relates to the “trustworthiness” by which the
including accounting for personal and research methods have been undertaken and is dependent on
method biases that may have influenced the findings. the researcher maintaining a “decision-trail”; i.e. the
researcher’s decisions are clear and transparent.
Ultimately an independent researcher should be able
to arrive at similar or comparable findings.

NEUTRALITY (or Confirmability)

Achieved when truth value, consistency and
applicability have been addressed. Centres on
acknowledging the complexity of prolonged
engagement with participants and that the methods
undertaken and findings are intrinsically linked to the
researchers philosophical position, experiences and
perspectives. These should be accounted for and
differentiated from participants accounts.