Abstract
A growing body of studies involves complex research processes facing many interpretations and iterations during the analyses. Complex research generally has an explorative in-depth qualitative nature. Because these studies rely less on standardized procedures of data gathering and analysis, it is often not clear how quality was insured or assured. However, one can not easily find techniques that are suitable for such complex research processes to assess the quality of the study. In this paper, we discuss and present a suitable validation procedure. We first discuss how ‘diagnosing’ quality involves three generic criteria. Next, we present findings of previous research in possible procedures to assure the quality of research in social sciences. We introduce the audit procedure designed by Halpern [(1983) Auditing Naturalistic Inquiries: The Development and Application of a Model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University] we found an appropriate starting point for a suitable procedure for quality judgment. Subsequently, we will present a redesign of the original procedure, with according guidelines for the researcher (the auditee) and for the evaluator of the quality of the study (the auditor). With that design, we aim to enable researchers to bring forward their explorative qualitative studies as stronger and more equally valuable to studies that can rely on standardized procedures.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
References
Driessen C.M.M. (2003). Analyzing Textbook Tasks and the Professional Development of Foreign Language Teachers. Utrecht, Utrecht University
Funke J. (1991). Solving complex problems: Exploration and control of complex systems. In: Sternberg R., Frensch P. (eds). Complex Solving – Principles and Mechanisms. Hillsdale, Lawrence Associates, pp. 185–222
Funder D.C. (1995). On the accuracy of personality judgment: A realistic approach. Psychological Review 102:652–670
Guba E.G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology Journal 29:75–91
Halpern E.S. (1983). Auditing Naturalistic Inquiries: The Development and Application of a Model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana
Lincoln Y.S., Guba E.G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, Sage
Middleton H. (2002). Complex problem solving in a workplace setting. International Journal of Educational Research 37(1):67–84
Miller, D. L. (1997). One Strategy for Assessing the Trustworthiness of Research: Operationalizing the External Audit. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
Rodgers B.L., Cowles K.V. (1993). The qualitative research audit trail: a complex collection of documentation. Research in Nursing and Health 16:219–226
Sale J.E.M., Brazil K. (2004). A strategy to identify critical appraisal criteria for primary mixed-method studies. Quality and Quantity 38:351–361
Schwandt T.A., Halpern E.S. (1988). Linking Auditing and Metaevaluation: Enhancing Quality in Applied Research. Thousand Oaks CA, Sage Publications Inc
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Akkerman, S., Admiraal, W., Brekelmans, M. et al. Auditing Quality of Research in Social Sciences. Qual Quant 42, 257–274 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-006-9044-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-006-9044-4
Keywords
- Audit
- quality procedure