Qualitative Experiments for Social Sciences
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | https://doi.org/10.36367/ntqr.6.2021.24-31 |
Resumo: | Abstract: This paper presents the qualitative experiment as an alternative methodological solution that combines an open qualitative approach, and a structured and controlled experiment. Using three studies, including both a qualitative experiment and a traditional in-depth interviews approach, we compare the findings of both approaches to identify the benefits and risks of qualitative experiments. Our findings contribute by presenting a methodological framework and technical recommendations based on three validity criteria (internal, external, and interpretivist validity). The results thereby contribute methodologically by empirically investigating the usefulness of qualitative experiments based on a combination of quantitative and qualitative validity criteria identified in the literature. |
id |
RCAP_df5d7a7808355fc0f01a7e3966a4c3f6 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.publi.ludomedia.org:article/274 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Qualitative Experiments for Social Sciencesqualitative experiments, validity criteria, methodology, qualitative researchAbstract: This paper presents the qualitative experiment as an alternative methodological solution that combines an open qualitative approach, and a structured and controlled experiment. Using three studies, including both a qualitative experiment and a traditional in-depth interviews approach, we compare the findings of both approaches to identify the benefits and risks of qualitative experiments. Our findings contribute by presenting a methodological framework and technical recommendations based on three validity criteria (internal, external, and interpretivist validity). The results thereby contribute methodologically by empirically investigating the usefulness of qualitative experiments based on a combination of quantitative and qualitative validity criteria identified in the literature.Ludomedia2021-03-12info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.36367/ntqr.6.2021.24-31https://doi.org/10.36367/ntqr.6.2021.24-31New Trends in Qualitative Research; Vol. 6 (2021): Qualitative Research: Practices and Challenges; 24-31New Trends in Qualitative Research; Vol. 6 (2021): Qualitative Research: Practices and Challenges; 24-31New Trends in Qualitative Research; Vol. 6 (2021): Qualitative Research: Practices and Challenges; 24-312184-777010.36367/ntqr.6.2021reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttps://publi.ludomedia.org/index.php/ntqr/article/view/274https://publi.ludomedia.org/index.php/ntqr/article/view/274/289Nadia Steilsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2023-08-13T09:12:46Zoai:ojs.publi.ludomedia.org:article/274Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T15:48:05.783439Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Qualitative Experiments for Social Sciences |
title |
Qualitative Experiments for Social Sciences |
spellingShingle |
Qualitative Experiments for Social Sciences Nadia Steils qualitative experiments, validity criteria, methodology, qualitative research |
title_short |
Qualitative Experiments for Social Sciences |
title_full |
Qualitative Experiments for Social Sciences |
title_fullStr |
Qualitative Experiments for Social Sciences |
title_full_unstemmed |
Qualitative Experiments for Social Sciences |
title_sort |
Qualitative Experiments for Social Sciences |
author |
Nadia Steils |
author_facet |
Nadia Steils |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Nadia Steils |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
qualitative experiments, validity criteria, methodology, qualitative research |
topic |
qualitative experiments, validity criteria, methodology, qualitative research |
description |
Abstract: This paper presents the qualitative experiment as an alternative methodological solution that combines an open qualitative approach, and a structured and controlled experiment. Using three studies, including both a qualitative experiment and a traditional in-depth interviews approach, we compare the findings of both approaches to identify the benefits and risks of qualitative experiments. Our findings contribute by presenting a methodological framework and technical recommendations based on three validity criteria (internal, external, and interpretivist validity). The results thereby contribute methodologically by empirically investigating the usefulness of qualitative experiments based on a combination of quantitative and qualitative validity criteria identified in the literature. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-03-12 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://doi.org/10.36367/ntqr.6.2021.24-31 https://doi.org/10.36367/ntqr.6.2021.24-31 |
url |
https://doi.org/10.36367/ntqr.6.2021.24-31 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://publi.ludomedia.org/index.php/ntqr/article/view/274 https://publi.ludomedia.org/index.php/ntqr/article/view/274/289 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Ludomedia |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Ludomedia |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
New Trends in Qualitative Research; Vol. 6 (2021): Qualitative Research: Practices and Challenges; 24-31 New Trends in Qualitative Research; Vol. 6 (2021): Qualitative Research: Practices and Challenges; 24-31 New Trends in Qualitative Research; Vol. 6 (2021): Qualitative Research: Practices and Challenges; 24-31 2184-7770 10.36367/ntqr.6.2021 reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799130348055953408 |