Gå til indholdScholarGate
BibliotekMit bibliotekSkrivebordReview StudioAssistent
Log ind
Trustworthiness Criteria in Qualitative Research/Bevis
Metodebevisregistrering

Trustworthiness Criteria in Qualitative Research

Trustworthiness is a framework for evaluating the quality and rigor of qualitative research, developed by Lincoln and Guba (1985) as an alternative to quantitative criteria (internal validity, external validity, reliability, objectivity). The framework comprises five criteria: credibility (findings are accurate and grounded in data), transferability (findings apply to other contexts), dependability (findings are consistent and defensible), confirmability (findings reflect the data and participants' perspectives, not researcher bias), and authenticity (research reflects diverse viewpoints and promotes understanding). This framework has become standard for assessing qualitative research across disciplines and guides researchers in designing and reporting rigorous qualitative studies.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Kilderegistrering

Citater kopieret ordret fra metodens kilderegistrering. Ingen påstandsniveauverifikation er udledt heraf.

Lincoln and Guba's Framework for Assessing Qualitative Research Rigor
Taksonomisk metoderegistrering · process-pipeline / qualitative-research
  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. SAGE Publications. · ISBN 978-0803924314
  • Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 105-117). SAGE Publications. · ISBN 978-0803950671
  • Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight big-tent criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837-851. · DOI 10.1177/1077800410383121
  • Whittemore, R., Chase, S. K., & Mandle, C. L. (2001). Validity in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 11(4), 522-537. · DOI 10.1177/104973201129119299
Åbn fuld metode

Kuraterede påstande

Påstande gemt i bevis-loggen, hver med sin egen vurdering.

Ingen kuraterede påstande endnu

Denne visning opfinder ikke en påstandsvurdering, når loggen ingen har.

Relaterede metoder

Genereret fra metodegrafen og vist som maskinelt foreslåede relationer — ingen bevispåstand er udledt.

Same method familyIn-Depth Interview Methodmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyMember Checking and Respondent Validationmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyParticipant Observationmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyReflexivity in Qualitative Researchmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Bevisstatus

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Kilder

4 registrerede citater, kopieret fra metodens kilderegistrering.

Handlinger

Åbn metodeside
ScholarGate

Et indholdsfokuseret opslagsbibliotek over forskningsmetoder — hvad hver metode er, hvordan den fungerer, og hvor den kommer fra.

Åbne data (CC-BY)

Opdag

  • Bibliotek
  • Søg i metoder…
  • Gennemse efter fagområde
  • Fagområder
  • Rejse
  • Sammenlign
  • Hvilken metode?

Reference

  • Fagområder
  • Atlas
  • Ordliste
  • Metodologi
  • Filosofi

Arbejdsområde

  • Mit bibliotek
  • Skrivebord
  • Chat

Virksomhed

  • Om
  • Priser
  • Kontakt
  • Foreslå en metode

Posterne er sammenstillet fra publicerede kilder til reference. Det er dit eget ansvar at kontrollere, at oplysningerne er korrekte og egnede til din anvendelse.

© 2026 ScholarGate · Et opslagsbibliotek over forskningsmetoder
  • Privatliv
  • Cookies
  • Vilkår
  • Slet konto