Bailey P H
School of Nursing, Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ontario.
West J Nurs Res. 1996 Apr;18(2):186-94. doi: 10.1177/019394599601800206.
Many nurse-researchers using qualitative strategies have been concerned with assuring quality in their work. The early literature reveals that the concepts of validity and reliability, as understood from the positivist perspective, are somehow inappropriate and inadequate when applied to interpretive research. More recent literature suggests that because of the positivist and interpretive paradigms are epistemologically divergent, the transfer of quality criteria from one perspective to the other is not automatic or even reasonable. The purpose of this article, therefore, is to clarify what the terms quality, trustworthiness, credibility, authenticity, and goodness mean in qualitative research findings. The process of assuring quality, validation, in qualitative research will be discussed within the context of the interpretive method, narrative analysis. A brief review of quality in narrative analysis nursing research will also be presented.
许多采用定性研究策略的护士研究者一直关注确保其研究工作的质量。早期文献表明,从实证主义视角理解的效度和信度概念,在应用于解释性研究时在某种程度上是不恰当和不充分的。最近的文献指出,由于实证主义和解释性范式在认识论上存在差异,质量标准从一个视角向另一个视角的转换并非自然而然,甚至是不合理的。因此,本文的目的是阐明在定性研究结果中,质量、可信度、可靠性、真实性和善性等术语的含义。将在解释性方法——叙事分析的背景下讨论定性研究中确保质量的过程,即验证。还将简要回顾叙事分析护理研究中的质量情况。