Myth 94: Qualitative Health Researchers Will Agree About Validity

Abstract

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.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 139 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.