Segunda tanda: 12 de julio de 2007

The words validity, reliability, credibility and dependability of research results are often used to assess the quality of research. Creswell (2013, p.243) suggested posing the questions on completion of a qualitative research study: “Is the account valid, and by whose standards?” and “How do we evaluate the quality of qualitative research?”. There is great debate in the literature on how best to approach these questions and validity in ethnography (LeCompte and Goetz, 1982) and netnography (Kozinets, 2015). Creswell (2013) synthesised eight different studies in the area of the validation of qualitative studies. Some authors use validation strategies which draw from quantitative validation techniques of internal and external validity, reliability and objectivity (LeCompte and Goetz, 1982). Some researchers argued that positivist and quantitative validation standards are not applicable to interpretive studies and qualitative methods. Ely et al (1991, p.95) stated, “The language of positivistic research is not congruent with or adequate to qualitative work”. Eisner (1991) made the point that credibility and dependability rather than validity are more relevant words for qualitative studies. In order to show credible results, a persuasive weight of evidence is required and an agreement between competent others is necessary (ibid).

5.10.1.Validation strategies

Creswell (2013) highlighted several validation strategies to evaluate and increase the accuracy of research. Five of these strategies are outlined below.

1. Prolonged engagement and persistent observation

Building trust with research participants over an extended period is important (Kozinets, 2015). Learning the culture and checking facts in order to draw out the salient information is also a crucial part of participant observation and increases credibility of findings (LeCompte and Goetz, 1982). Data was gathered for an extended period of time and three final

interviews were conducted with football social media managers in order to test and verify the findings in this study.

2. Triangulation / Crystallisation

Some authors claim research validity by the use of triangulation. This is the process of bringing different data sources, methods and theories together to make new meaning and corroboration (Creswell, 2013). Richardson and St. Pierre (2005) proposed that the image of the triangle is too fixed, rigid and two-dimensional for research validation. Instead of

triangulation as the central image for validation, they proposed that the image of crystallisation is more appropriate. Crystals act as prisms, reflecting externalities and

refracting to create new colours and patterns in different directions, growing. This compares favourably with the analysis approach used in this thesis.

3. Clarifying researcher bias

In qualitative research, it is important that the values of the researcher are properly

acknowledged. Taking into account any biases or assumptions that the researcher may have from the beginning is also important for valid and rigorous studies. The status or biases of the author were clarified at the beginning of this study and neutrality and an open mind were kept throughout.

4. Thick description

This weight of evidence can also be bolstered with the use of thick description (Geertz, 1973) to “make sure that the findings are transferable between the researcher and those being studied” (Creswell, 2013, p.246). Thick description has been discussed earlier in this chapter and was utilised as part of this study.

5. Peer review and external audit

consultant to examine both the process and the product of the account to assess accuracy. The auditor should have no other connection to the project and evaluates if the data support the findings ultimately. Member checking allows the views of the participants to analyse the findings and interpretations of the study (Bowler, 2010). Creswell (2013, p.252) stated, “I do not take back to participants my transcripts or the raw data, but my preliminary analyses”. Bowler (2010, p.1274) reinforced this saying “the researcher should employ member checking by presenting some or all of the final research report’s findings to the people who have been studied in order to solicit their comments”. This is a strategy employed in this thesis by presenting on-going findings to interviewees, participants and others via the researchers PhD blog. In addition, writing blog posts, articles, papers, conference

presentations and the PhD assessment process further allowed people to review and audit this study on an ongoing basis. The final three interviews with football social media managers added additional external audit and verification of the findings.

5.10.2.Data analysis

Miles and Huberman (1994, p.8) wrote about the interpretive approach to data analysis and stated that interpretivists are “no more detached from their objects of study than are their informants”. Even though they may not take on all of the attributes of the culture under study, they are temporarily members of that culture. This means that they are affected by their own judgements and interpretations of the data, which is often co-elaborated. Miles and

Huberman advise the use of “pre-established instruments”. These instruments including research tools and design can help mitigate the analytic problem of separating external information from what the researcher has contributed when “decoding and encoding the words of their informants” (ibid).

An important aspect of using CAQDAS software is the coding of data, which is a

fundamental part of qualitative data analysis (Creswell, 2013). The codes are generated by the researcher to find the important information and to create themes from the data. Creswell suggested for most qualitative studies, 25-30 categories, combined into six overall themes. This type of approach can also help inform the way that coding an analysis happens. Miles and Huberman (p.9) outlined a set of analytic methods for qualitative research which include:

o Assigning codes

o Isolate patterns and processes for the next wave of data collection

o Find a small set of generalisations

o Confront these generalisations with a formalised body of knowledge of constructs and theories.

Creswell (p.208) suggested the template below for the coding of ethnographies.

Figure 32 - Template for coding an ethnography (Creswell, 2013)

The five elements of theoretical lens, description of culture, analysis of different themes, field issues and interpretation are brought together in this study to describe how this particular culture of the SCFC online community works. In order to do this though, ethical standards and issues were also addressed.