Reliablity vs Validity
Reliability vs. Validity
By:
Framing and Analyzing Problems: Research Strategies for Leaders (PD)
Professor Gordon McLean
July 8, 2011
The purpose of this weeks’ discussion is to evaluate and analyze an article by identifying issues related to general method reliability and validity. The article that was chosen was “Trust in the Face of Conflict: The Role of Managerial Trustworthy Behavior and Organizational Context” by Korsgaard, M. A., Brodt, S. E., & Whitener, E. M. (2002). This paper will discuss how negative conditions between employees’ and management pose a risk in trust. Reliabity and validity are pertinent in getting a true assessment of how negative conditions can affect the employee morale.
Korsgaard, M. A., Brodt, S. E., & Whitener, E. M., wrote an indebt article on trust and negative events and how it relates to management and employee interactions. This article proves that it is essential for management to understand how imperative it is to implement trust and willingness to listen to their employees in the workforce. In this article reliability and validity shows to be accurate due to the overwhelming amount of evidence that proves that management needs to implement the changes in order to improve employee morale and willingness to work hard. Reliability referred to the stability of findings; on the other hand validity represented the truthfulness of findings (Altheide & Johnson, 1994).
The article does not appear to represent one just a quantitative research or one of a qualitative research so this research must be considered a mixed method approach. There is not numerical terminology displayed in this article but does have extensive information on other proven ideas and past research. Qualitative research seeks depth over breadth and attempts to learn subtle nuances of life experiences as opposed to aggregate evidence. Qualitative research is contextual and subjective versus generalizable and objective.
By:
Framing and Analyzing Problems: Research Strategies for Leaders (PD)
Professor Gordon McLean
July 8, 2011
The purpose of this weeks’ discussion is to evaluate and analyze an article by identifying issues related to general method reliability and validity. The article that was chosen was “Trust in the Face of Conflict: The Role of Managerial Trustworthy Behavior and Organizational Context” by Korsgaard, M. A., Brodt, S. E., & Whitener, E. M. (2002). This paper will discuss how negative conditions between employees’ and management pose a risk in trust. Reliabity and validity are pertinent in getting a true assessment of how negative conditions can affect the employee morale.
Korsgaard, M. A., Brodt, S. E., & Whitener, E. M., wrote an indebt article on trust and negative events and how it relates to management and employee interactions. This article proves that it is essential for management to understand how imperative it is to implement trust and willingness to listen to their employees in the workforce. In this article reliability and validity shows to be accurate due to the overwhelming amount of evidence that proves that management needs to implement the changes in order to improve employee morale and willingness to work hard. Reliability referred to the stability of findings; on the other hand validity represented the truthfulness of findings (Altheide & Johnson, 1994).
The article does not appear to represent one just a quantitative research or one of a qualitative research so this research must be considered a mixed method approach. There is not numerical terminology displayed in this article but does have extensive information on other proven ideas and past research. Qualitative research seeks depth over breadth and attempts to learn subtle nuances of life experiences as opposed to aggregate evidence. Qualitative research is contextual and subjective versus generalizable and objective.
References: Altheide, D.L., & Johnson, J.M. (1994). Criteria for assessing interpretive validity in qualitative research. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 485-499). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Goodwin, L. D., & Goodwin, W. L. (1984). Are validity and reliability "relevant" in qualitative evaluation research? Evaluation & the Health Professions, 7(4), 413–426. Hammersley, M. (1992). What’s wrong with ethnography? Methodological exploration. Korsgaard, M. A., Brodt, S. E., & Whitener, E. M. (2002). Trust in the face of conflict: The role of managerial trustworthy behavior and organizational context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 312–319. Retrieved from the PsycARTICLES database Whittemore, R., Chase, S. K., & Mandle, C. L. (2001). Validity in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 11(4), 522–527. Retrieved from Health Sciences: A SAGE Full-Text Collection