Validity and reliability

In all qualitative research, the issues of validity and reliability need to be addressed in showing the credibility of one’s findings. Under this section, internal and external validity and reliability are defined; and where it is possible, what have been done to maximize these in my study will also be explained.

4.10.1 Validity

Validity is concerned with the accuracy of findings; with internal validity referring to the extent to which observations and measurements are true representations of a certain reality, and external validity that deals with the degree to which such representations could be compared across groups (LeCompte and Goetz, 1982).

As an effort to maximise the internal validity of my study, I use triangulation, which is a strategy used to cross-validate or cross-check qualitative data. In

ethnographic research, triangulation is especially important as there is an expectation for multiple data sources or collection procedures to come together to support a conclusion (Suter, 2012). For my study, this is where the different data sources, namely transcripts, field notes, interviews, and questionnaires are employed. Guided by my research questions, I set out to look for language patterns in transcripts of conversations. To try and establish its significance, I probed my participants during the focus group to elicit more information on their habits and motivation for their language use. Similarly, for their affiliation with one another, the transcripts once again served as the primary source of data as they feature the interactions between my participants, and along with that, I referred to the field notes that have been taken while observing my participants and the questionnaires, particularly the section on

69

respondents’ language use. Not to mention, interviews were essential as they gave me a good opportunity to make enquiries and verify my findings. On top of the sources of data, one imperative technique that I used for triangulation is respondent validation. To quote Bloor (1978, pp. 548-549, cited in Hammersley and Atkinson, 2007), it aims to ‘establish a correspondence between the sociologist’s and the member’s view of the member’s social world by exploring the extent to which members recognize, give assent to, the judgements of the sociologist’. With my participants, respondent validation was done twice; during the focus groups, where questions were put forth in seeking their clarification and confirmation; and after the analysis had been done, where I shared my findings and my participants either affirmed or rejected them. By doing so, a more thorough validation could be carried out, hence increasing and strengthening the credibility of the findings. The advantage of respondent validation is that the participants who are directly involved in the study may have additional knowledge of the context and access to their own experience of events, which are not accessible to the researcher (Hammersley and Atkinson,

2007). In combination with respondent validation is the use of stimulated recall, which can ‘prompt participants to recall thoughts they had while performing a task or

participating in an event’ (Gass and Mackey, 2000, p. 17). For this to be done, my participants’ transcript was sent to them as it can be an effective aid to help them remember the context of their speech, and to relive the situation as it happened then.

External validity, on the other hand, is about generalisation and can pose a problem in ethnographic research, mostly because of the context of the study. Thus, the setting has to be stated explicitly in order to make generalisations. While its focus is narrow, it can have broad relevance; for example, a research of a bilingual

community would reveal similar patterns of language use that were found in other bilingual communities.

4.10.2 Reliability

Reliability refers to whether studies can be replicated, and by that, it means obtaining similar results as those of a previous study. While external reliability looks at whether independent researchers will come upon the same phenomena or produce like constructs in the same or similar settings; internal reliability is concerned with the degree to which other researchers will match a set of constructs that have been

70

generated previously, with data in the same way as the original researcher (LeCompte and Goetz, 1982).

Generally, unlike experimental research, the test for reliability is a great challenge in ethnographic research, and this is mainly due to the nature of the research process and data, and the way in which the findings are presented. The former constraint involves studying the complex behaviours of participants in

everyday situations that take place in natural settings; so it is therefore not surprising that no ethnographic study can be replicated in the exact same manner, even if the same research methods are used. Nonetheless, an attempt can be made to achieve external reliability by being systematic in the collection and analysis of data, and making sure that the methods used are specified and described thoroughly

(LeCompte and Goetz, 1982). As for the presentation of findings, it should be written in an informative way and creates an accessible and credible picture of a culture or society (Madden, 2010). Also, it is necessary to mention that the internal reliability of my research may be increased with the use of a voice recorder, as the data can be preserved and other researchers who are allowed access could use it to verify certain important details (LeCompte and Goetz, 1982).