EXTERNAL VALIDITY
Transferability
 

Dissertation or Thesis

Validate the Accuracy of Qualitative Data by Using a Peer Debriefer, External Auditor, or Evaluator: Assessments or critiques are to be either included in the Broader Ream of Society section or at the conclusion of Chapter 5 or in the Appendix.

"External validity can only be assessed by better understanding how the focal variables in one's theory [or conceptual framework] interact with moderator variables that are seen as irrelevant early in a research stream" (Lynch, 1999, Abstract section).

How might the researcher or readers better understand?
 Though generalization, which is applying results (based on findings from collected data) to new settings (disciplines), new people, or new samples (Creswell, 2003).

External validity is "concerned with the generalizability of the conclusions reached through observation of a sample [subject/participants] to the universe [population/new sample: peer-debriefer, external auditor, or evaluator]; or, more simply stated, can the conclusions drawn from a sample be generalized to other cases [applied to or across other disciplines]" (Leedy, 1997, p. 34)?

Peer Debriefer
(note the word - "peer")

"Use peer debriefing to enhance the accuracy of the account. . . . a person [peer debriefer who is familiar with the researcher and project (e.g., the researcher's editor, manager, or colleague from a professional association, whom the researcher has discussed the work; not the committee members or original subjects)] who reviews and asks questions about the qualitative study [e.g., how variables in the theory interact with the researcher's variable] so that the account will resonate with people other than the researcher [committee members, and the sample: original subjects]" (Creswell, 2003, p. 196).

Note: A peer-debriefer can also serve as an internal validator (credibility) instead of an external validator (transferability).  "Use peer debriefing to enhance the accuracy of the account. . . . a person [peer debriefer who is familiar with the researcher and project (e.g., the committee members --dissertation defense; original subjects] who reviews and asks questions about the qualitative study [e.g., how variables in the theory interact with the researcher's variable] so that the account will resonate with people other than the researcher" (Creswell, 2003, p. 196).

Service:

• Read Chapters 1 through 5 thoroughly for 6.0 hours
• Compose five (5) comprehensive questions, which may have subquestions
• Telephonic or electronic interview the researcher
• Compose a 3- to 5-page assessment, which includes the interview questions, answers, and analysis (i.e., dependability)
• Does not include editing or checking for consistency within the dissertation document

Email dissertation to brigettebrenda@aol.com and send along with payment of $1,200.00.

External Auditor/Reviewer

"Use an external auditor to review the entire project. As distinct from a peer debriefer, this auditor is new to the researcher and the project [i.e., person that have not read or are not knowledgeable of the researcher's work; cannot be the committee members, researcher, or original subjects] and can provide an assessment of the project [e.g., how the variables in the theory interact with the researcher's variable] throughout the process of research or at the conclusion of the study . The role is similar to that of a fiscal auditor, and specific questions exist that auditors might ask" (Creswell, 2003, pp. 196-197).

Service:

• Read Chapters 1 through 5 thoroughly for 6.0 hours
• Compose a 1-page assessment (i.e., dependability & confirmability)
• Does not include editing or checking for consistency within the dissertation document

If candidate's entire project needs to be assessed at the conclusion of the study, email dissertation to brigettebrenda@aol.com and send along with payment of $950.00.
 

Devil Advocate

"Present negative or discrepant information that runs counter to the themes. Because real life is composed of different perspectives [i.e., not the committee members, researcher, or sample] that do not always coalesce, discussing contrary information adds to the credibility of an account for a reader" (Creswell, 2003, p. 196).

Services:

• Read Chapters 1 through 5 thoroughly for 6.0 hours
• Compose a 1-page critique of themes (i.e., dependability & confirmability)
• Does not include editing or checking for consistency within the dissertation document

If candidate's entire project needs to be critiqued at the conclusion of the study, email dissertation to brigettebrenda@aol.com and send along with payment of $950.00.

INTERNAL VALIDITY (CREDIBILITY)

Note: The use of original subjects: the process of member checking, which is an internal validity strategy. The use of the researcher: the process of (a) using rich, thick description to convey finding, (b) clarifying the bias the researcher brings to the study--a self reflection, (c) and so forth, which are internal validity strategies. Refer to Creswell and Leedy for more information.

References:

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Leedy, P. D. (1997). Practical research: Planning and design (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Lynch, J. G. (1999). Theory and external validity. Academic of Marketing Science, 27(3), 367. Retrieved December 27, 2006, from ProQuest database.