Skip to main content

Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries

Abstract

This is the ninth ERIC/ECTJ Annual Review Paper, preparation of which was supported by the ERIC (Educational Resources Information Center) Clearinghouse on Information Resources, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York. The material in this article was prepared pursuant to a contract with the National Institute of Education, U.S. Department of Education. Contractors undertaking such projects under government sponsorship are encouraged to express freely their judgment in professional and technical matters. Points of view or opinions do not necessarily represent the official view or opinion of NIE. The author is grateful to David Clark, Larry Havlicek, Robert Heinich, John McLaughlin, Cecil Miskel, and Robert Wolf for their careful critique of an earlier version of 1his paper, and to his wife, Yvonna Lincoln, from whose joint work with the author in other contexts many of the ideas expressed in this paper emanated.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Brunswik, E. Representative design and probabilistic theory in a functional psychology.Psychological Review, 1955,62, 193–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research on teaching. In N. L. Gage (Ed.),Handbook of research on teaching. Chicago, Ill.: Rand Mc-Nally, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology.American Psychologist, 1975,30, 116–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K. The logic of naturalistic inquiry. In Norman K. Denzin (Ed.),Sociological methods: A sourcebook. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, J. D.Investigative social research. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisner, E. W.The educational imagination. New York: Basic Books, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geertz, C.The interpretation of culture. New York: Basic Books, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L.The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, Ill.: Aldine Publishing, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E.G. Toward a methodology of naturalistic inquiry in educational evaluation.CSE monograph series in evaluation, No. 8. Los Angeles, Calif.: Center for the Study of Evaluation, UCLA, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E. G. Naturalistic inquiry.Improving Human Performance Quarterly, 1979,8, 268–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S.Effective evaluation. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass, in press.

  • Gulliksen, H.Theory of mental tests. New York: Wiley, 1950.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A.The conduct of inquiry. San Francisco, Calif.: Chandler Publishing, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q.Qualitative evaluation methods. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, M.Personal knowledge. New York: Harper & Row, 1958.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinharz, S.On becoming a social scientist. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruby, J. Exposing yourself: Reflexivity, anthropology, and film.Semiotica, 1980,30, 153–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwen, T. M. Professional scholarship in educational technology: Criteria for judging inquiry.AV Communication Review, 1977,25, 5–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scriven, M. Objectivity and subjectivity in educational research. In Lawrence G. Thomas (Ed.),Philosophical redirection of educational research, 71st Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part 1. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scriven, M. Maximizing the power of causal investigations: The modus operandi method. In G. V. Glass (Ed.),Evaluation studies review annual, vol. 1. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spradley, J. P.The ethnographic interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. E.Evaluating the arts in education. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., & Sechrest, L.Unobtrusive measures. Chicago, Ill.: Rand McNally, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, R. L.An overview of conceptual and methodological issues in naturalistic evaluation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, Calif.: April 1979.

  • Wolf, R. L., & Tymitz, B. Toward more natural inquiry in education.CEDR Quarterly, 1977,10, 7–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zukav, G.The dancing Wu Li masters: An overview of the new physics. New York: Bantam, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Guba, E.G. Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. ECTJ 29, 75–91 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766777

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766777

Keywords

  • Tacit Knowledge
  • Multiple Reality
  • Member Check
  • Propositional Knowledge
  • Audit Trail