Validity and Reliability

Although the importance of validation in qualitative studies and more specifically in case studies is unquestionable (Creswell, 2013), the terms used to describe it as well as the procedures proposed by different researchers to establishing it, differ substantially. Lincoln and Guba (1985), for example, proposed terms such as credibility, authenticity, dependability and confirmability to establish the trustworthiness of a research study since those terms were regarded as fitting more appropriately a constructivist paradigm compared to validity and reliability that have been extensively used in quantitative analysis. Given the many perspectives, the researcher will capitalise on suggestions made by Creswell

114 (2013), who conceptualises validation as an attempt to assess the accuracy of the findings. Creswell considers validation:

as a distinct strength of qualitative research in that the account made through extensive time spent in the field, the detailed thick description, and the closeness of the researcher to participants in the study all add to the value of accuracy of a study (p. 250).

Creswell (2013) also recommended the employment of multiple validation strategies proposed by many different researchers as far as those are able to document the accuracy of the study. Drawing on the above and in order to enhance validation, the study utilised several techniques. Firstly, the researcher has a prolonged engagement in the certain field of study, something that is regarded as contributing significantly to the validity and credibility of the findings.

Prolonged engagement is closely associated with the development of trust between the researcher and the participants, as well as with a better understanding of the domain and the culture (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), leading to more accurate results as the researcher is more capable of making decisions about what is salient to the study (Creswell, 2013). In addition, it is important to clarify that the researcher has a long term involvement in sponsorship research and more specifically in football sponsorship, as well as a practical experience within the particular field in Cyprus – the researcher served as a member of the board of APOEL Sport Academy for six years, and she is currently a board member of the Cyprus Sport Management Association dealing with scientific research in sport management related topics, as well as with the organisation of seminars on sport management offered to sport practitioners in Cyprus. In addition, the researcher has been employed by the European University Cyprus as a lecturer in sport management and marketing since January 2005. Clarifying past experiences, possible prejudices and orientations that were likely to have influenced or shaped interpretation of the findings is a crucial step in enhancing validation of a study (Creswell, 2013), since the reader has the opportunity to

115 understand the researcher’s position and assumption that may impact the inquiry.

For the purposes of the present study, the researcher believes that her professional background in the field of sport marketing can be regarded as a bias that can strengthen validity of a study, as Merriam (1998) argued. In other words a certain amount of involvement with the domain is positive while balanced by a certain amount of detachment seeking to generate some relative objectivity (Kilminster, 2004).

Furthermore, the researcher employed triangulation in the methodological sense, corroborating evidence gathered from multiple sources such as in-depth interviews, observation and internal and external documents that confirmed and validated the emerging findings. Furthermore, peer debriefing also took place as the whole process as data analysis was provided to knowledgeable colleagues for an external check. Peer debriefing is important in improving validity of the findings since it is a method ensuring that the emergent findings are grounded in the data (Marshall & Rossman, 2011). Member checking was also employed by the researcher as the transcripts were sent to the participants for editing and the researcher confirmed that there were no amendments in the original documents.

In addition, data analysis was discussed with three of the participants of the study in order to get their critical observations or interpretations, so as to reduce the likelihood of misinterpretation. Sharing data with participants is regarded as an important activity for establishing the credibility of a study (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) as participants are provided with the opportunity to judge the accuracy of the findings. Similarly, Stake (1995) recommends that participants should have an active role in case study research so as to enhance the accuracy of the findings.

Finally, the researcher provided a thick and detailed description of the study and the methodology adopted in an effort to improve transferability of the findings.

Although the issue of generalisability of the findings was discussed above and as already mentioned this might be regarded as one of the shortcomings of a qualitative case study, the researcher reiterates the fact that generalising the

116 findings is not one of the goals of this study. Rather the concern here is to identify different causal mechanisms operating in different types of case explored. At the same time, it should be mentioned that rich and detailed descriptions have been provided in order to enable the reader to transfer information and knowledge to other similar settings sharing similar characteristics and qualities. According to Marshall and Rossman (2011), by stating explicitly theoretical parameters, research design and methods “those who make policy or design research studies within those same (or sufficiently similar) parameters can determine whether the cases described can be generalised for new research policy and transferred to other settings” (p. 252).

In addition to the several validation standards employed by the researcher in this study, reliability was also pursued. Reliability refers to techniques and strategies pursuing consistency, that is, if the study were to be conducted by another researcher similar findings would be obtained. Ensuring reliability in qualitative studies is again, a task that is achieved in several different ways. The present study employed several strategies in enhancing reliability of the findings. Firstly, the researcher attempted to enhance reliability through obtaining detailed field notes, by tape-recording the interviews, and by transcribing in detail the whole interview, including pauses and overlaps that according to Creswell (2013) may sometimes indicate apparently trivial but often crucial details. Furthermore, reliability was further enhanced by the fact that the interviewing context was also the same (offices) and the use of an interview guide.

In addition, intra-coder reliability was also employed, with the researcher performing the coding process twice in different time periods. This method provides an estimate of the consistency of judgments within a coder over time, since inconsistency may result from factors such as fatigue, mood or carefulness.

In addition to intra-coder reliability, inter-coder reliability was also achieved to a certain degree since part of the coding process has been reviewed extensively and independently by two additional researchers (supervisor and co-supervisor) in

117 an effort to achieve external checks on the interpretive process. The use of multiple coders to analyse transcript data and conducting inter-coder agreement checks is a technique heavily recommended in qualitative inquiry (Creswell, 2013).

Finally, the researcher’s efforts to increase reliability of the findings also incorporated the utilisation of a case study protocol (see Appendix 2). A case study protocol consists of an overview of the case study project, field procedures, case study questions, and a guide to the case study report, and it is suggested by Yin (2003) as a crucial tool for enhancing reliability of case study findings.