The 'Holy Trinity' of Methodological Rigor: A Skeptical View
Main Article Content
Abstract
Rigor in research is normally conceived of as the means by which integrity and competence are confirmed (Tobin & Begley, 2004).1 That is, a way of demonstrating the legitimacy or soundness of the research process. Without rigor, it is argued, there is a danger that research may become fictional journalism and therefore worthless as contributing to knowledge (Morse, Barrett, Mayan, Olson, & Spiers, 2002).
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright and Permissions
Authors retain full copyright for articles published in JMDE. JMDE publishes under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY - NC 4.0). Users are allowed to copy, distribute, and transmit the work in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes, provided that the original authors and source are credited accurately and appropriately. Only the original authors may distribute the article for commercial or compensatory purposes. To view a copy of this license, visit creativecommons.org
References
Morse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), Article 2. Retrieved July 16, 2006 from http://www.ualberta.ca/~ijqm/
https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690200100202
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Przeworski, A. (1987). Methods of cross-national research, 1970-1983: An overview. In M. Dierkes, H. N. Weiler, & A. B. Antal (Eds.), Comparative policy research: Learning from experience(pp. 31-49). Aldershot, England: Gower.
Raiffa, H. (1968). Decision analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Sandelowski, M. (1995). The problem of rigor in qualitative research. Advances in Nursing Science, 8(3), 125-130.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00012272-198604000-00005
Scriven, M. (2006). Can we infer causation from cross-sectional data? Retrieved August 31, 2006 from http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bota/School-Level Data_Michael Scriven-Paper.pdf
Scriven, M. (2006, September). The latest battle in the war over research designs for establishing causation. Paper presented at The Evaluation Center's Evaluation Café series, Kalamazoo, Michigan.
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Spearman, C. (1907). Demonstration of the formulae for true measurement of correlation. American Journal of Psychology, 18(2), 161-169.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1412408
Spearman, C. (1913). Correlations of sums and differences. British Journal of Psychology, 5, 417-426.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1913.tb00072.x
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tobin, G. A., & Begley, C. M. (2004). Methodological rigour within a qualitative framework. Journal of Advance Nursing, 48(4), 388-396.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03207.x
Trochim, W. M. K. (2002). Qualitative validity. Retrieved July 18, 2006 from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/qualval.htm
Winter, G. (2000). A comparative discussion of the notion of 'validity' in qualitative and quantitative research. The Qualitative Report, 4(3/4). Retrieved July 16, 2006 from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR4-3/winter.html
https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2000.2078
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.) (Applied Social Research Methods Series, Vol. 5). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.