1. 質 性 研 究 Ma1c0112 林芳億

2. How is trustworthiness established Trustworthiness is established in a naturalistic inquiry by the use of techniques that provide truth value through credibility, applicability though transferability, consistency through dependability, and neutrality through confirmability.

3. A:Prolonged Engagement B:Persistent Observation C:Triangulation D:Referential Adequacy Materials E:Peer Debriefing F:Member Checking

4. A:Prolonged Engagement The first of the techniques that help establish the truth value or credibility of a naturalistic inquiry is prolonged engagement.

5. Prolonged Engagement Prolonged engagement provides a foundation for credibility by enabling the researcher to learn the culture of an organization or other social setting over an extended time period that tempers distortions introduced by particular events or by the newness of researchers and respondents to each other’s presence.

6. Distortion 1.Distortions may be caused by the events that occur within a particular time span. 2.Distortions to the research may be introduced by the respondents or the investigator and may be unintended or intended. 3.Distortions may include personal biases of the researcher that favor a particular organizational management style or a particular teaching style.

7. Distortion 4.Distortions also occur simple because of the attention given to individuals during the research, attention that may cause them to act or react differently. 5.Distortions may be caused by respondents wanting to please the investigator, presenting their own personal inclinations, wanting to deceive or confuse the researcher, or not wanting to respond at all.

8. B:Persistent Observation While prolonged engagement serves to temper distortion caused by the researcher’s presence, persistent observation accentuates that presence by actively seeking out sources of data identified by the researcher’s own emergent design. Persistent observations helps the researcher sort out relevancies from irrelevancies and determine when the atypical case is important.

9. C:Triangulation Triangulation leads to credibility by using different or multiple sources of data, methods, investigators, or theory. Methodological triangulation can take many forms, but it will usually be the combination of two or more different research strategies.

10. Triangulation Investigator triangulation simply means that multiple as opposed to single observers are employed. Theoretical triangulation is an element that few investigations achieve. It involves the use of several perspectives in the analysis of the same set of data.

11. D:Referential Adequacy Materials Referential adequacy materials support credibility by providing context rich, holistic materials that provide background meaning to support data analysis, interpretations, and audits.

12. E:Peer Debriefing Peer debriefing helps build credibility by allowing a peer who is a professional outside the context and who has some general understanding of the study to analyze materials, text working hypotheses and emerging designs, and listen to the researcher’s ideas and concerns.

13. Peer Debriefing Furthermore, the debriefing session should include a discussion of the emerging methodological design, and a written reflective paper for the audit trail should be prepared at the end of each session.

14. Peer Debriefing With regard to peer debriefing, the researcher must be aware that he or she has relationships both with members in the organization and with professional colleagues.

15. F:Member Checking Member checking provides for credibility by allowing members of stake holding groups to test categories, interpretations, and conclusions.

16. Member Checking 1.Member checking may be conducted at the end of an interview by summarizing the data and allowing the respondent to immediately correct errors of fact or challenge interpretations. 2.Member checking may be conducted in interviews by verifying interpretations and data gathered in earlier interviews. 3.Member checking may be conducted in informal conversations with members of the organization.

17. Member Checking 4.Member checking may be conducted by furnishing copies of various parts of the inquiry report to various stake holding groups and asking for a written or oral commentary on the contents. 5.Before submission of the final report, a member check should be conducted by furnishing entire copies of the study to a review panel of respondents and other persons in the setting being studied.

18. Member Checking Member checking is not as easy as it may seem. The researcher review “the black-and-white” interpretations of their cultures. There are dangers that exist in the member- checking process. Some systems do not support criticism. Another danger is that member checks can be misleading if all the members share some common myth or conspire to mislead.

19. Researchers Skipper(1989) Lightfoot(1983, p370) Fleisher(1989) Johnson(1975,p111;p142) Lincoln and Guba(1985,p304) Jacobs(1991,p115)

20. Thank you for your listening!