Internal validity vs. external validity in research
While often terms associated more closely with quantitative research, internal and external validity can still be relevant concepts to understand within the context of qualitative inquiries. Grasping these notions can help qualitative researchers better navigate the challenges of ensuring their findings are both credible and applicable in wider contexts.
Internal validity
Internal validity refers to the authenticity and truthfulness of the findings within the study itself. In
qualitative research, this might involve asking: Do the conclusions drawn genuinely reflect the perspectives and experiences of the study's participants?
Internal validity revolves around the depth of understanding, ensuring that the researcher's interpretations are grounded in participants' realities. Techniques like
member checking, where participants review and verify the
researcher's interpretations, can bolster internal validity.
External validity
External validity refers to the extent to which the findings of a study can be generalized or applied to other settings or groups. For qualitative researchers, the emphasis isn't on statistical generalizability, as often seen in quantitative studies. Instead, it's about transferability.
It becomes a matter of determining how and where the insights gathered might be relevant in other contexts. This doesn't mean that every qualitative study's findings will apply universally, but qualitative researchers should provide enough detail (through rich, thick descriptions) to allow readers or other researchers to determine the potential for transfer to other contexts.
