Issues* | Strategies** |
---|---|
Objectivity/confirmability | Reflexivity/participant objectivation (researcher's biography, values, a priori assumptions, perspectives, theoretical biases, etc.) Particularity (doing justice to the integrity of each case) Case study protocol (detailed description of methods and procedures) Project logbook (decisions, procedures, communications, meetings, etc.) Case study database (including case study notes, case study documents, tabular materials, analyses, etc.) Chain of evidence (explicit links between the questions asked, the evidence, and the conclusions drawn) Consideration of competing hypotheses or rival conclusions |
Internal validity/credibility | Methodological triangulation Data source triangulation Investigator/analyst triangulation Theory/perspective triangulation Specification of the unit of analysis Rich and thick description of context (settings, participants, procedures, etc.) Rigorous and systematic fieldwork procedures Reliability of coding and pattern analyses (using multiple coders) Establish a chain of evidence Integrity in analysis (search for and analysis of alternative themes, divergent patterns, rival explanations and negative cases) Member checking (respondent validation) |
External validity/transferability | Rich and thick description of context Rich description of findings Keeping methods and data in context (when communicating findings) Use replication logic Audience review (primary intended users of the report) Generation of theoretical statements |
Reliability/dependability | Strategic design congruent with research questions Paradigm specified Case study protocol, case study database, chain of evidence and project logbook available for review Final coding cross-checked and verified with a second analyst (researcher) Standardized data collection Expert audit review (doctoral committee, peer reviewers for scientific publications and presentations) |