Within the research process, epistemology questions with focus on reliability and validity are important. According to Crotty (1998), there are four basic elements in a research process: the methods we propose, the methodology that governs our choice and use of methods, the theoretical perspective which lies behind the methodology and the epistemology that informs the theoretical perspective. Crotty (1998) defines epistemology as ‘the theory of knowledge embedded in the theoretical perspective and thereby in the methodology’. It is ‘a way of understanding and explaining how we know what we know’ (p.3)
The epistemology in this study is constructionism and thus, following Crotty’s (1998) argument, symbolic interactionism, ethnography and constructionism need to be related to one another. This link is important for this study since the aim of this research is to explore a cultural phenomenon through qualitative research, looking at how young Maltese women construct meaning out of the music they listen to through communication, interpretation and adjustment between individuals. In constructionism, there is no objective truth but ‘truth or meaning comes into existence in and out of our engagement with the realities in our world’ (p.8). Meaning is constructed so different people construct different meanings around the same thing, although people often share the same meaning as well. This approach is the core of this research because the aim of the study is actually to
understand how young Maltese women incorporate the music they listen to in everyday discourse and identities. It thus focuses on the meaning that these young women give to their music. Young women have often shared meanings or collective meanings but within these collective meanings are other meanings and significance that each young woman constructs in a slightly different way.
The epistemology raises questions about objectivity of knowledge, reliability and validity as well as the nature of the interview research.
Objectivity in the knowledge produced from interviews is sometimes questioned (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009, pp.242-243). In my role as researcher, I was aware that reflexive objectivity, in the sense of being reflexive about my contributions to the production of knowledge, was of utmost importance. I therefore, strove to be sensitive about my prejudices and my subjectivity and acknowledged them in my writing where necessary.
Reliability, consistency and trustworthiness of the research findings, although associated with positivistic research are still important and were tackled by checking consistency of interviewees’ answers, checking whether they gave different replies when questions were re-worded and asked later on in the interview. The interviewer’s reliability was ensured by being aware that wording of questions and tone of voice may influence the answers. Consistency between interviewers, transcribers and coders was ensured since all these roles were carried out by myself as the researcher.
Moreover, as Silverman (2005) suggests, when quoting from transcripts, detailed presentations of verbatim accounts of what respondents said were used rather than summaries of data, to provide the reader with the context in which the respondent said what she did. In this way, the reader is not reliant on the researcher’s depiction of what was going on in the interview.
Validity refers to results which can be accurately, truthfully and confidently interpreted and has to do with the process and organisation of the data collection. Validity in a research study has two aspects: internal and external validity. Internal validity addresses the ‘true’ causes of the outcomes observed in a research study. This means that results are a function of the conditions observed, measured or manipulated in the study and not due to other factors which were not addressed in the study. External validity refers to using the results of a research study to make claims not just about the participants but also
about a larger population of which the participants are a sample (Bracht & Glass, 1968, pp.437-474).
According to Kvale and Brinkmann (2009, pp.244-247), validating of a research project consists of three main strategies done during the different stages of the research, namely checking, questioning and theorising. In the interviewing stage, internal validity was ensured by keeping the research questions as the focal points. Although at times questions were not direct, they were asked with the aim of gaining information which the researcher set out to obtain, so that the interviews yielded data about what the study set out to find. When interpreting, validation is then choosing among the competing interpretations and providing arguments to support the choice. When necessary, I, as the researcher arbitrated my own findings and interpretations. Care was taken to conduct careful questioning to the meaning of what was said during the interview and continual checking of the information obtained. Internal and external validity were also ensured while transcribing and translating from the oral to the written language, as well as from the Maltese language to the English language, through the choice of linguistic style of the transcript and the choice of words that would convey the message that was closest to the original as possible, in translation. While reporting, I tried to give a true valid account of the main findings of the study and supported these by theorising them with reference to the theories which were discussed in the Literature Review chapter.