Myth 94: qualitative health researchers will agree about validity.
In a recent editorial, Morse warned against qualitative health researchers turning their backs on fundamental concepts such as validity and called on them to think, reconsider, and undo. With a view to stimulating further dialogue, in this article the author explores where this thinking, reconsidering, and undoing might take us in relation to the concept of validity. Four perspectives on this issue are presented for discussion: the replication, parallel, diversification, and letting-go perspectives. Each is seen as worthy of consideration in its own right, and it is suggested that coexistence of the perspectives is possible despite their differences. The implications of various forms of coexistence are discussed in relation to the problem of criteria. It is recommended that qualitative health researchers learn to judge a variety of approaches in different but appropriate ways.
Sparkes
A C
AC
Qualitative Research Unit, School of Sport and Health Services, Exeter University, St. Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, Devon, United Kingdom, EX1 2LU. A.C.Sparkes@exeter.ac.uk
D005069:Evaluation Studies as Topic; D006302:Health Services Research / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards; D006801:Humans; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D014481:United States