Reconsidering evaluation criteria regarding health care research: toward an integrative framework of quantitative and qualitative criteria

Hiroaki Miyata, Ichiro Kai

研究成果: Article査読

1 被引用数 (Scopus)

抄録

Debate about the relationship between quantitative and qualitative paradigms is often muddled and confused and the clutter of terms and arguments has resulted in the concepts becoming obscure and unrecognizable. It is therefore very important to reconsider evaluation criteria regarding rigor in social science. As Lincoln & Guba have already compared quantitative paradigms (validity, reliability, neutrality, generalizability) with qualitative paradigms (credibility, dependability, confirmability, transferability), we have discuss use of evaluation criteria based on pragmatic perspective. Validity/Credibility is the paradigm concerned to observational framework, while Reliability/Dependability refer to the range of stability in observations, Neutrality/Confirmability reflect influences between observers and subjects, Generalizability/Transferability have epistemological difference in the way findings are applied. Qualitative studies, however, does not always chose the qualitative paradigms. If we assume the stability to some extent, it is better to use the quantitative paradigm (reliability). Moreover as a quantitative study can not always guarantee a perfect observational framework, with stability in all phases of observations, it is useful to use qualitative paradigms to enhance the rigor in the study.

本文言語English
ページ(範囲)319-328
ページ数10
ジャーナル[Nippon kōshū eisei zasshi] Japanese journal of public health
53
5
出版ステータスPublished - 2006 5
外部発表はい

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • 医学(全般)

フィンガープリント

「Reconsidering evaluation criteria regarding health care research: toward an integrative framework of quantitative and qualitative criteria」の研究トピックを掘り下げます。これらがまとまってユニークなフィンガープリントを構成します。

引用スタイル